A II I S T O R Y 



or THE 



^ 



MODEL" MAYOR? 



THE P.AKK JOHN W. CATER; THE SHIP 



.lOSERII WALKER. 



1 \ 



li\ 



\ 



FERNANDO WOOD MASKED! A FORGED BILL OF SALE! 
FORGED LETTERS! 




"The Pkopi.e wirx efxct me ^fAYoi; THnr(m T snon.n roMviT a 

SH'KDEK IN MY FAMILY BETWEEN THIS AND Tiy: Ki.EOTION." — Fcrnaildo WoOtl, 

on tho I'Vt! of his election to the .Nfavoriilly in 1854. 



A BTOGRArilV OF FERNANDO WOOD. 



A II I S T () R T 



FOIKJERIES, rERJllUES, 



OTHKR CKTMKS 



(,(, 



MODEL" MA^ OR 



n 



nsTo. 1. 



In presenting to the public the first number of the " Mercantile, Politi- 
cal, and Otficial Lile of our 'Model' Mayor," we embrace the opportunity 
of assuring the people of the city that not a line will be written that is not 
susceptible ot the strongest corroborative testimony, by living witnesses- 
men and women of unimpeachable intepritv-the names of whom we will 
give. The foUowmg numbers of this Biography will be the production of 
various pens, ot persons who are familiar with the mercantile, political, and 
oflScial career of Fernando Wood, from early life to the present day. 



A. HISTORY 

OP THE 

PRITATE, POLITICAL, AND OFFICIAL 
VILLANIES 

OF 

FERNANDO WOOD. 



To Brown, Brothers & Co., 
Goodhue & Co., 
George Douglass, 
E. L. & A. Stuart, 
Jacob Little, 
Schuyler Livingston, 
Matthew Morgan, 

R. H. "WiNSLOW, 

Royal Phelps, 
Decoppet & Co., 
Fletcher Harper, 
WiL H. Macy, 
L. C. Clark, 
Thomas Small & Sons, 



T. F. Bulklet, 
Wm. B. Astor, 
Moses Taylor, 
"Watts Sherman 
"Wm. H. Cary, 
A. B. Neilson, 
George Newbold, 
Chaiiles a. Morgan, 
Dated Ogden, 

COURTLANDT PaLMES, 

Daniel Drew, 
Israel Corse, 
Horace "Waldo, 
E. M. Young. 



Gentlemiin : 

There is not an individual, nor any number of individuals in this great commer- 
cial metropolis, to whom we could with greater propriety dedicate this work than 
yourselves. You are ardent and zealous in the advancement of the commercial 
interests of our city, and of the whole Union, and mu3t deeply deplore every cir- 
cumstance that tends to retard mercantile enterprise. You are careful to uphold 
the true dignity of your profession, and to encourage the legitimate exercise of its 
duties. Most of you are known extensively as men of fortune, whose wealth 
equals that of princes, and your munificence, liberality and charity have been on 
a scale as magnificent as the fortune you have acquired. It is, or should be, the 
pride of your life that you have amassed wealth by honest enterprise and upright 






2 DEDICATION. 

dealing, and not by fraud and oppression. We believe each of you have a reputa- 
tion for integrity in business, and would positively refuse to employ, even ia the 
humblest capacity, ia your mercantile establishments, or other places of business, a 
man who had been guilty of the grossest frauds in the transaction of mercantile 
affairs. You would certainly refuse to become associated with, or to admit as a 
partner in your business, a man who had, in a former partnership, plundered his 
partner in every possible way that his ingenuity could devise, and whose frauds 
had been proven beyond a possibility of doubt. 

Entertaining this opinion, we have dedicated this pamphlet to you. We wish 
you to peruse it candidly ; and we the more expressly desire you to do so, because 
we observe in the public papers, of a recent date, that you have voluntarily urged 
the present Mayor of this city to consent to a reelection. The individual you thus 
have honored with your approbation is the hero of these pages. He, too, has been 
a merchant, and we have faithfully portrayed his admirable qualifications for mer- 
caatile pursuits. Tou have recommended him for Mayor, though not one of you 
would consent to employ him in your counting-house, when his true character 
becomes known to you. We are ignorant of the influences that have controlled 
your action in this matter. If, as men of great wealth, you expect to give direction 
to public sentiment in the politics of the city, in the movement you have made, 
you will find that you have been mistaken. 

We shall print for your special perusal, 20,000 copies of this pamphlet, and at 
least three times that number for the 60,000 mechanics, artisans, and laboring 
classes of this city, who have at least as deep an interest in the election of honest 
public officials as the 28 merchants to whom we have dedicated this work, or the 
" 83 OTHERS," who, it is alleged, have joined you in the urgent request that the 
present Mayor would consent to a reelection. 

By the Author. 



INTEODUCTION. 



In the followiug pages will be found a brief history of a series of mercantile 
frauds and villanies, aad poUtical and ofBcial wrongs, of the present Mayor of Xew- 
Tork. In recording them, we have not gone beyond the most undoubted and in- 
contestable proof of their existence. We have not stated a fact, drawn an infer- 
ence, or even imagined a single circumstance that has not been proven by testimony 
as strong as ever was given in a court of justice, and by men of as fair characters 
for truth and veracity, as ever were engaged in business in our city. The alleged 
frauds of Fernando Wood, are proven beyond a possibility of doubt. They stand 
on record, never to be eilaced. No rebutting testimony has shaken the belief of 
any of the men who have investigated them legally. They are proven as plain as 
the sun of heaven at noonday, in an unclouded sky, both by direct and circum- 
stantial evidence. No rogue ever resided within the walls of a State prison, or ever 
will, who was convicted of forgery by more unmistakable evidence, than that 
which was given to prove that Fernando "Wood exlaibited to Ed. E. Marviue, a 
fraudulent or forged bLU of sale of the barque John W. Cater, and a forged letter 
purporting to have been received from T. 0. Larkin of California. Yet Fernando 
Wood swore that such a charge against him was untrue I Wo will not argue what 
constitutes perjury in the legal sense of the term, but no one can doubt, after read- 
ing this pamplilct, and investigating the case for himself, that in a moral sense, 
Wood is guilty of both forgery and perjury I 

The perpetrator of these frauds is now Mayor of this great commercial city, and a 
candidate for reelection. His friends wiU again appeal to the voters of this city 
for support. He has the whole of the vast patronage of the city government to 
aid him, and no one knows how to use this power more adroitly. What a sad com- 
mentary upon the mercantile enterprise, business character, intelligence, and integ- 
rity of our people, his reelection to the mayoralty would be I Those who supported 
hun when ignorant of his frauds, may be excused. But now, when these villanies 
are proven, they can have no excuse for giving him their support. 

If he, or those who may still beheve him an honest man, feel aggrieved at the 
following statement of facts, there is now time before the election to show its falsity. 
If they can not do tliis, as honest men, having a desire to promote public and pri- 
vate moraUty, and preserve the reputation of our city, they will use every honora- 
ble effort to defeat his election. 

What would be the effect upon the trade of our city, were all, or even a majority 
of our merchants, shown to be as devoid of mercantile integrity as Fernando 
Wood ? Or what would be the effect upon the pohtics of our city, if all, or a ma- 
jority of our leading politicians were proven to be as corrupt in business, private 
or official, as Mayor Wood ? No people can long preserve a reputation for integ^ 
rity, and no government can long be popular, where the perpetrators of such frauds 



4 INTRODUCTION. 

as those charged and proven against our Mayor, are elected to the highest oflBces. 
To suppose the reverse of this, is to admit that the majority of the voters are cor- 
rupt, or too ignorant to exercise the franchise with safety to the public welfare. 
We hope it will be long before this admission can be truthfully made in any part of 
this great and free republic. 

High political excitement oftentimes leads to a close adhesion to party nomina- 
tions ; and the immense patronage of our city government, including a control over 
the entu-e police force, wielded by a tyrant hand, may force a nommation of the 
most corrupt man in the community. But we think the public mind will be 
aroused against Fernando "Wood, to such an extent, that he will fail in his reelec- 
tion. His true character will be portrayed so vividly that he can not succeed. 

"When a candidate in 1854, he sought interviews with many whom he had a 
right to suppose would oppose him, as they knew much of his real character, and 
of the alleged frauds charged upon him. He endeavored to persuade them that he 
had been unjustly accused ; but when finding that he could make no impression on 
their minds in this direction, he then appealed to them for forgiveness, and soUcited 
them to give him an opportunity to redeem his character through his election to 
the mayoralty. He stated, in some instances, that he sought this high position 
chiefly to remove, by his good conduct in ofQcial position, the deep prejudices that 
existed against him. This appeal induced some to support liim, who otherwise 
would not have done so. When arrayed against a single opponent. Wood was 
easily beaten, as was the case in 1850, when he was beaten by several thousand 
votes. But he saw in the mayoralty contest, in 1854, that there would be several 
candidates, and that if he could get the endorsement of the Democracy, or of the 
Seymour party, he could slip in by a plurality vote. He was right in his calcula- 
tion. 

But what effort did he make to redeem his character after he was elected ? His 
policy at first was to be bold, and seemingly honest, Napoleonic m the style of his 
pubUc documents. But no sooner had he begun to get the good opinion of some 
who had opposed his election, than he found it convenient, and to his interest, to 
take a stroU in the neighborhood of the sunken ship Joseph Walker, lying at the 
slip, foot of Dover Street, in which entombed craft he imagined he saw a second 
John W. Cater. The first draft he made on the city treasury, on account of this 
sunken treasure, was a contract with his fi-iend Jones to raise her, for the snug little 
sum of $13,000 ! He succeeded in getting a greater part of this amount out of the 
treasury, when the press got hold of the matter, and further drafts on this account 
were dishonored. But his ft'iend Jones got some seven or eight thousand dollars on 
this fraudulent contract. 

This showed that the express desire to reform, when once in the Mayoralty 
chair, was a mere pretense for the perpetration of other frauds, if possible on a more 
gigantic scale, where the city treasury, much larger than Marvine's capital, held the 
plunder. His whole conduct while Mayor, has shown that he is the same identi- 
cal Fernando Wood, who converted a biU of V5 cents, into $100.75, and rendered 
it to his partner, thus fi-audulently altered, and received the one half of the fraudu- 
lent amount from him in the final settlement of theu- accounts. He is still the 
same Fernando Wood — grown probably more bold in villainy, by having the people's 
endorsement for the mayoralty — that he was when he exhibited a forged bill of 
sale for the barque John W. Cater, by which he plundered his partner out of 
$4000 I Elevation to high oflScial position, has about the same efiect upon his 
moral nature, as the sight of a fat pullet does upon the physical propensities and 
^petite of a hungry foK. Such is the character of Fernando Wood, the Mayor of 



FIRST NOMINATION — DEFEAT. 5 

New-York, as will be conclusively shown in what follows. Read, and then say 
whether he is persecuted, or whether he stands condemned of the perpetration of 
the grossest frauds in private business affairs, and in his official career. The cry of 
persecution will not avaU now. Here are the charges, and the evidence of 
their truth ; they must stand until shown to be false. 

The acts of a public man are properly subjects of close scrutiny. His general 
character for honesty and fair deahng may be properly referred to when up for ofiSce, 
or when holding one. A man who will aid in the elevation to oflQce, of such a man 
as we have represented Mayor "Wood to be, is a dangerous citizen. It is, therefore 
the duty of every man to satisfy himself whether we have charged him wrongfully 
or whether we have told the truth. We have simply stated the irresistible convic- 
tions of our own mind, and, we feel assured, those cf the mind of every man who 
has been engaged in the investigation of the legal proceedings which have baen 
instituted hi the cases referred to in this pamphlet. "We feel satisfied that no can- 
did mind can come to any other conclusion than that to which we have arrived, if 
they will investigate the matter. 



HISTORY. 



WOOD'S rmsT nomination foe mayor in isao-ms defeat. 

In 1850, Fernando Wood became a candidate for the Mayoralty. On the eve of 
the election, there was sent to the office of one of our city papers an astounding 
document, a copy of a complaint made by the assignees of Edward E. Marvine, In 
a suit then pending in the Superior Court in this city, in which Fernando Wood was 
defendant. In this complaint Wood was charged with gross frauds upon Marvine, 
perpetrated during a partnership that existed between them in 1848-9. The 
proprietor of the paper to which a copy of this complaint had been sent, refused to 
publish the document, unless he could bo satisfied of its general truth. It so hap- 
pened that many of the alleged frauds perpetrated by Wood were easily examined. 
Documents were placed in possession of the proprietor of the paper, and several of 
the merchants, of whom Wood had purchased goods on account of the partnership, 
were visited, and the bills which Wood had rendered his partner were compared 
with the books of the merchants, when it was found that the grossest frauds had 
been committed. Being thus fully satisfied of the truth of the alleged frauds, the 
complaint against Wood was published, with strong editorial comments. Though 
Wood was defeated badly for the Mayoralty, many voted for him who would 
not had they believed the charges against him. They were made on the eve of 
the election, and many, therefore, doubted as to their truth. 

Mr. Wood managed to keep this case in court until he again became a candidate 
for the Mayoralty in 1854. Then, too, the charges were reiterated in one of our 
city papers, but, unfortunately, their publication was again deferred until within a 
day or two of the election. Though much proof of the alleged frauds then existed, 
they were pubUshed in a paper not read by the masses, and, therefore, did not have 
that extensive circulation they should have had. This time, although Wood ran 
several thousand behind his ticket, there were so many opposmg candidates to di- 
vide his opponents, that he shpped into the Mayoralty chair by a small plurality. 
The Seymour ticket was popular, as we aU remember, and Wood was adroit enough 



6 SECEET POLITIOAT/ MASKED ORGANIZATIONS. 

to identify himself witli the success of that ticket, and was consequently elected. 
His official career while Mayor will be r^iewed by one competent to perform the 
task. It is now being prepared for publication. The following pages relate more 
particularly to the deep villainy of Fernando "Wood in those relations of life 
where honor and integrity shine with peculiar lustre, and where villainy has even 
a blacker aspect than when practised in official positions. 



THE SECRET POLITICAL MASKED OKGANIZATIONS GOT UP BY MAYOR 

WOOD. 

It is now about twenty years ago when Fernando "Wood first became an aspir- 
ing and ambitious politician in this city. In 1840, he succeeded in being nomi- 
nated and elected to Congress. For the purpose of^ securing the nomination, he 
organized a secret political association, composed of five members from each ward. 
This secret body met at No. 44 Chatham street, and all the members wore masJcs, 
and were sworn to the most profound secrecy. The form of the oath is now in pos- 
session of Alaycr Wood, and is drawn up in language something resembling the 
oath which Morgan had published as that taken by Masons, a few years before our 
" model" Mayor came to this city to reside. The initiatory oath of this masked as- 
sociation was comparatively harmless to the one taken just before the candidate 
entered the inner temple at 44 Chatham street. The candidate for admission was 
blindfolded when he entered the room. His mask was so constructed that all was 
total darkness to him. All that transpired at these meetings were kept a most 
profound secret. Those who spoke disguised their voice so that they should not bo 
recognized. 

Several of our most respected and influential citizens were induced to join this 
masked secret organization, believing that the interests of the Democratic party 
were the object. Men of means were placed on the Finance and other important 
Committees. 

Two of the five members from each ward were chosen to organize other asso- 
ciations in tlie city. For this purpose they were associated with three persons 
from each ward, not members of the association, and en*.irely ignorant of the exist- 
ence of sucli a secret masked body. By these means a great variety of associa- 
tions were formed, all of which were controlled bj"- the central, secret, masked 
body, of wliich Fernando Wood was the originator. 

The machinery was all in perfect order, and the design was to control all the 
nominations of the party in the city. It operated with a power unseen and unfelt 
by all the outsiders in the party. When Tammany Hall opened its doors to the 
nominating convention chosen by this secret, masked organization, so admirably 
was every thing arranged, that on the first ballot for members of Assembly, of 
wMch there were thirteen, chosen by general ticket, twelve were nominated nearly 
unanimous ; and the other candidate of this masked organization was nominated 
on the next ballot. Wood was nominated for Congress, and nearly every man that 
he desired was successful. The outside Democrats could not teU how the thing 
was done, nor who did it. But it was done. 

At the head of this singular organization was the man who is now Mayor of the 
city, and who asks to be reelected. Several persons joined it without knowing or 
supposing that so many ridiculous features marked an entrance to it, or that its ob- 
ject was to give Fernando Wood the power to make all the nommations. Many, 
when they found out the object, were disgusted, and withdrew. 

A similar association, except the masks, vras recently organized by the Mayor 
to compel his renomination, and also to control every nomination made or to be 
made by the Democratic party this Fall. In this association none were admitted 
but those who were the friends of the Mayor, and many of them were his appoint- 
ees to office, and quite a number members of the police, a body of men which the 
Mayor has publicly avowed should not mingle or take an active part in the poUtics 
of tho city. In this movement the Mayor has so far been successful, although he 
has called forth an opposition in the ranks of the Democratic party that bids fair 
to insure his defeat at the polls. 



THE CELEBEATED PAETNERSHIP ERAUDS. Y 

THE CELEBRATED PARTNERSHIP FRAUDS OF OUR "MODEL" MAYOR— 
THE MAR VINE CASE-A FORGED BILL OF SALE— TWO FORGED LETTERS 
—A SCORE AND MORE OF.FRiUDULENT ALTERATIONS OF BILLS AND 
VOUCHERS— UNPARALLELED VILLAINY IN MERCANTILE LIFE. 

In the latter part of the year 1848, Fernando Wood designed sending to Califor- 
nia a quantity of merchandise. The gold discoveries on the Pacific coast were 
then just beginning to excite the cupidity of our merchants and others, and Mr. 
"Wood designed to be among the first to make his fortune in the California trade. 
Not being overstocked with cash at that period of his life, he very naturally looked 
about him to find pecuniary means to aid in the enterprise. He thought of his 
friend Edward E. Marvine, then residing in this city, who had been an old mer- 
chant, had retired from business many years, was worth about $100,000, and had 
good credit with merchants who knew him. Between Wood and Marvine there 
existed a relationship, and a warm personal fWendship. Under these circum- 
stances our hero, the present Mayor of New-York, wended his way one evening, 
in the latter part of the year 1848, to the residence of Marvine, then hving in one 
of our up-town streets. Ho briefly opened upon the object of his visit, but was 
told that, in consequence of some friends who had called that evening to see Mr. 
Marvine on a social visit, some other opportunity must be embraced by Mr. Wood 
to develop more fully his scheme of making a fortune in the California trade. The 
time and place for a second interview was agreed upon. At this interview Mr. 
Wood was fully prepared with a glowing statement, proving conclusively that if 
Marvine would join him in the enterprise, a large fortune would surely result. To 
convince Marvine of the success of the enterprise, he showed a letter purporting to 
be from T. 0. Larkin, then residing in California in the capacity of government 
agent. In this letter Mr. Wood was strongly urged to send out a quantity of mer- 
chandise to California. Accompanying the letter was a memorandum which 
named many of the articles that should be sent as most suitable to the market at 
that time. In this letter, which was dated in July, 1848, it was stated that the 
pretended writer, Mr. T. 0. Larkin, was greatly indebted to Mr. Wood, for import- 
ant favors shown him, and that he would hke an opportunity to return those 
favors, and that this was the first time he had had the means to repay the obhga- 
tion. Mr. Wood was urged in this forged letter to ship some $10,000 worth of 
goods to the California market, and he was told in it that he would realize 
$100,000 profit on the shipment. 

At that time Mr. Marvine had no reason to believe that this letter was a forged 
document, got up by Wood to induce him to enter into partnership with him. 
But such was its real character 1 Marvine confided in the truth of the represent- 
ations made by Wood, and acceded to the proposal of partnership. 

But before the partnership agreement was drawn up, Mr. Wood desired to per- 
petrate another fraud on Marvine. He had purchased an old barque, the " John 
W. Cater," for $4000. He proposed that Marvine should purchase the one half of 
this barque, and that the goods for the California market should be shipped in her. 
He stated that the barque cost him $12,000, and that he had just paid that 
amount for her in cash. He said he would sell to Marvine the one hah" of said 
barque for $6000. Not finding Mr. Marvine so ready and desirous to purchase the 
one half of the barque as he supposed, and fearing that the reason of his hesitation 
arose from some doubts about the value of the vessel, or as to the price Wood sa d 
he paid for it, he, Wood, invented a plan to remove these supposed objections. 
To do this it was necessary to introduce another forged document, in the shape of 
a bill of sale, purporting to be the original instrument by which the barque had 
been conveyed to Wood, by its former owners. In this forged bill of sale the cost 
price of the barque was stated at $12,000, and her age not over eleven years. Not 
ibr a moment supposing that Wood had prepared a false bill of sale, Marvine pur- 
chased the one half of said barque, at the price of $6000. 

Theae preliminaries being settled, the partnership agreement was drawn up and 
signed. In this agreement, the sale and purchase of one half of the barque, the 
price paid for it, and the manner of payment, were described- The parties also 
.agreed to purchase $20,000 worth of goods to be shipped on board of her, each 



8 THE MARTINE CASE, 

party paying $10,000. It was further agreed that Wood should make all the 
purchases, keep a correct account of their cost, and of all the disbursements, and 
also the receipts of such moneys as may have been derived from passengers before 
the departure of the barque. When the goods wire sold the returns were to be 
equally divided between the parties, so soon as they could be received in this city. 
Afterwards, it was agreed to increase the goods shipped from $20,000 to $26,000. 

Such was the nature of the agreement between the parties, brought about 
entirely by the false representations and forged documents exhibited by Wood. 

The barque was laden, and she saUed on the 19th day of October, 1848. Mr. 
Wood, two days afterwards, rendered to Marvine an account of the disbursements 
which had been made under the agreement, for fittmg out the cargo of said vessel, 
and for the purchase of the ship's stores and supphes. This balance-sheet, or 
account, was prepared by Wood himself, in his own hand-writmg, and to which 
he appended his name. At the time he rendered this account he also furnished to 
Marvine the original bills, invoices, and vouchers, taken from the parties of wliom 
purchases had been made, and to whom the barque had become indebted. These 
original bills and vouchers corresponded with the account rendered by Wood. Be- 
lieving all to be correct, Marvine settled with Wood. He did not then suppose 
that Wood had with liis own hand altered nearly every one of the bills. He saw 
interlineations and alterations in the bills, which changes appeared to have been 
made in Wood's own handwriting, but he was not then prepared to believe that 
Fernando Wood could have actually perpetrated such a wholesale forgery of 
accounts. Wood asserted that all the vouchers and bills were original, made out 
by the parties to whom he paid moneys on account of the joint enterprise, aud so 
Marvine paid one half of the account rendered. 

But after this settlement suspicions began to harass the mind of Marvine, that all 
was not right. He exhibited these bills and vouchers to a mercantile friend; 
true copies of them were prepared, and these copies had placed on them the 
initials of his friend. Marvine began to inquire of the merchants and others to 
whom the barque had become indebted. On the very threshold of this inquiry 
there was unfolded to his view a systematic series of frauds, forgeries, and villanies, 
without a partllel in the history of mercantile partnerships. The bills and 
vouchers rendered by Wood to Marvine were in many instances more than double 
in amount of the actual price paid for them ! Bills were rendered, as it afterwards 
appeared, for goods never shipped, or never put on board of the barque. In a few 
words, the true bills were horribly mutilated by Wood, in a manner clearly show- 
ing that he had no other object in view than that of swindling his partner. 

After various ineffectual efforts to settle the matter with Wood, a suit was insti- 
tuted in the Superior Court, for the recovery of some six or seven thousand dollars, 
which was about the extent of the frauds or overcharges that Marvine had then 
discovered. It was subsequently agreed to refer the matter, and the Court 
appomted three referees to try the case. It is but recently that the referees gave 
a unanimous decision against Wood; judgment and costs amounting to ataoait 
$15,000, about the one half of which is costs. The case was decided against 
Wood on every point, by evidence so clear and convincing that none could doubt. 
During the investigation, other frauds of Wood, not previously known to Marvine, 
were developed. But as he had not included them in his original complaint; and 
as they formed no part of the pleadings, he could not be benefited by the new 
developments of fraud and forgery on the trial before the referees. 

Now, the reader may naturally ask. Where is your proof of these astounding 
facts, frauds, or forgeries? We must give enough of this proof to satisfy any fair 
man. To give the whole case would occupy at least some three hundred pages of 
the size of those in this pamphlet. But wo wUl give enough of it to remove all 
doubt from the mind of the reader, as to the forgeries and perjuries of Fernando 
Wood, the present Mayor of New-Tork. 

What was the first allegation of fraud in this matter ? From the pleadings 
which are sworn to by both parties, and wliich are composed of the plaintiffs' com- 
plaint, and the answer of the defendant, we find that it is alleged on the part of 
the_ plaintiffs, that Wood, in order to induce Marvine to become his partner, ex- 
hibited a forged letter, purporting to have been written by T. 0. Larkm, of Califor- 
nia. Wood denies this, under oath, in his answer. 



EXTKACTS FROM TESTIMONY. 9 

Now, if some four or five respectable men come upon the stand and swear that 
Wood exhibited such a letter to them, and that, in some instances, Marviue was 
present; and if T. 0. Larkin also comes upon the stand and swears that he never 
wrote such a letter, nor did he ever write any letter to Mr. "Wood, nor even know 
him at that time, we suppose, under such circumstances, no sane man will doubt 
that Wood did show such a letter, and that the plaintiffs' oath is true, and the 
defendant's oath is false. 

Extracts fbom TESTISIO^'Y as to the ExniBirioN op the Forged Letter 
FROM T. 0. Larkin. 

Henry A. Smyth's testimony.— I am a merchant in this city; I was present at an interview 
between Wood and Marvine, in the fall of 1S48; it was at my store, 31 Broad street; the conver- 
sation was in regard to a shipment of merchandise to California, by the John W. Cater; Mr. 
Wood produced a written list of articUs recommended to he shipped to California, coming, as he 
said, from a friend there ; there was a letter accompanying this list, which Mr. Wood showed me ; 
I either glanced over the letter, or it was read to me ; Mr. Wood said it was from a Mr. Larkin, 
■who held some office in California — eitlier N. O. Larkin or T. O. Larkin ; I saw the signature, and 
as near as I can remember, it was T. O. Larkin ; he said the list and letter contained information 
very valuable, worth at least $5UiXl to any man. Mr. Wood represented this Larkin to be a con- 
sul, or holding some other office under government in California, and that he furnished him with 
this Information in consideration of the procuring the office by Wood. The object seemed to be 
to show me the inducements held out by Wood, so that 1 would either sell them goods or recom- 
mend them to my friends. I did so recommend them. 

Charles Partridge's testimony. — ily store is at No. 3 Courtlandt street ; I know Mr. Wood ;. 
he purchased from me nine cases of matches In the fall of 1S4S ; he showed me a letter from T. O. 
Larkin, in government employ ; the letter was shown to me within a month or two before the sale 
of the matches; my attention was called to this letter more than once by Mr. Wood ; the sub- 
stance of the letter was that there was a great cliance to make money if goods were sent to Cali- 
fornia of a description as mentioned in a catalogue ,«cnt with the letter, which catalogue I saw in 
the liands t)f Mr. Wood ; it may, or may not, have been a part of the letter ; Mr. Wood said he 
received the letter from T. O. Larkin, \\-ith whom he had become acquainted while he. Wood, was 
in Congress; that he had assisted Mr. Larkin to the office he held, or had used his influence to get 
him aiipointed. I first saw this O. Larkin letter at Wood's store, corner of South and Dover 
streets ; I think I had it in my hand, and looked at some of the statements in it; the signature 
was T. O. Larkin, I am positive of that; I eaw the same letter in my store afterwards; Wood 
showed It to me. 

Benjamin IT. Folger's testimony. — I reside in the city of Buffalo ; my business is that of a 
hardware mercliant; in the year 1S4S I resided in the city of New- York, and did bu^iness there; 
I have known Mr. Marvine for more than twenty years. On or about the 'iSth of Se|>tember of 
that year, Mr. Marvine introduced me to Fernando Wood. Mr. Wood exhibited to said Marvine 
and myself a memorandum of an assorted cargo of goods, which paper he said he had received from 
T. O. Larkin, of San FrfOicisco, who then held some government appointment, which he, Wood,, 
had obtained for him when in Congress, and in gratitude for that act of friendship he had sent Mr. 
Wood, privately, this list. 

Mr. T. O. Larkin's testimony.— 1 reside at present in New-York ; in 1S4S I resided at Monte- 
rey, California; I was U. S. Consul, U. 8. Navy Agent, and U. 8. Storekeeper there at that time; 
I had been Consul there four or five years previous to 1S4S ; I had been doing business in that 
country, directly or indirectly, as a merchant, for sixteen or eighteen years; in l54S I did not 
know Fernando Wood; had never received a communication from him; had no knowledge of 
writing him ; was under no obligations to him for any favors, nor had he ever rendered me any 
assistance. I did not write any letter to him recommending any shipment or adventure to Cali- 
fornia, nor send him any list of articles useful for that market ; no other person named Larkin was 
connected with the U. S. government in California in that year. 

A. T. Marmne's testimony. — I reside at Delhi, Delaware Co., this State; I know the defend- 
ant, Wood, by sight ; I first saw him in the fill of 1*4S ; I received a letter from my brother, Ed. 
E. Marvine, reqiiestinsr me to go to California, and came to this city for that purpose; I found, on 
my arrival, that Mr. Wood was one of the parties, and I 6)llowed his directions in all I <lid in this 
city; I went on board the barque as a passenger; Henry Kichardson, a brother-in-law of Mr. 
Wood, was also a passenger. I understood when I came here, that the expedition h.id been got 
■up in consequence of a letter received by Mr. Wood from T. O. Larkin. and that they had been 
hought according to a list furnished by Mr. Larkin. My brother, Mr. Ed. E. Marvine, directed me, 
by letter, to call on Mr. Larkin, and express to him a sense of obligation or thanks for the information 
he had furnished ; I did so ; quite a dialogue ptssed between us before I could make him under- 
stand what I meant; I finally told him he might understand that he had written a letter to Fer- 
nando Wood, and had sent to him a list of goods wanted in California, and that the goods had been 
sent, and I was one of the passengers of the expedition. He then said he was glad we were doing 
■well with it, but he had no recollection of any such man as Fernando Wood, and had never writ- 
ten such a letter, nor sent such a list to him. 

We do not for a moment suppose, after reading the above, that any one wiJl 
have the least doubt that Fernando Wood exhibited to Marvine a forged letter, 
having the signature of T. 0. Larkin. Human testimony can not be given of any 



10 FALSE, FOEGED, AND SIMULATED BILLS. 

fact of a stronger character. Yet he denies on oath that he ever did ! That the 
letter was a forgery is sliown by the very person from whom "Wood said he received 
it, who never wrote to, or evea knew Wood at that time. Look at the character 
of the witnesses who swear that Wood showed them the letter. Who is Henry A. 
Smyth ? Who are Charles Partridge, and the others who swear that Wood, on 
more than one occasion, exhibited this letter ? They saw the signature, read, and 
heard read, the contents, looked at the list of articles which it was alleged Mr. 
Larkin advised to have sent to the California market. 

We now pass to the second forged document in this case. 

Extracts of Testiiiont relative to the forged Bill of Sale of the Barqub 
John W. Cater, exhibited by Wood to Marvine. 

Sen^mnm TI. Folger's iestimony.— Mr. Wood exhibited to Mr. Marvine and myself, in my 
store, a paper purporting to be a bill of sale of the barque John W. Cater, in which the price paid 
by Wood for the barque was stated at $12,000. Marvine said he knew nothing about vessels, but 
then bought the one half of the barque at $6,000. I purchased, at the request of Wood and Mar- 
Tine, some hardware to be sliipped on the barque, and applied to two oifices in Wall street to have 
it insured. Both offices declined, on account of the a^e of the barque. One of them said the 
barque was so old that she was out of the books. Neither office would take the risk at any pre- 
mium, and laughed .at me for trying to effect an insurance on so old a vessel. At the time Wood 
exhibited the bill of sale referred to, he said the barque was fiom nine to eleven years old. I 
reported the result of my visit to the Insurance offices to Mr. Wood, when he answered me that 
he could get any amount done on her that he wanted, and requested me not to mention the subject 
to Mr. Marvine, who was then in Auburn. He then showed mc the bill of sale to him of the 
barque, filled up for the consideration of $12,000, and said that ho had expended $1,000 in putting 
her in good order. 

James Boyington's testimony.— Jn 1848 I was a merchant of the firm of Smith & Boyirgton. 
Our firm owned the barque John W. Cater. We became her owners in 1S44. Her papers werj 
issued in 1831. We bought her of Captain C. K. Davis for $4,21)0. We sold her in Mav. 1S47, to 
Fernando Wood for $4,000, and executed a bill of sale to him. Wo never executed a bill of sale 
in which tho consideration was $12 000; but I presume the consideration expressed In the bill of 
sale was $4,000, the sum for which she was sold. 

Is not this conckLsive as to the existence and exhibition of a forged bill of sale? 
Instead of some nine or eleven years, the barque was seventeen years old in 1848, 
and instead of costing Wood $12,000, he only paid $4,000. 

Wood swears in his answer to the complaint, that he never exhibited a bill of 
sale of the said barque. Now, what are we to call this ? Is it not perjury ? It 
is true that in swearing to the truth of legal pleadings of this nature, you only 
swear positively as to those matters that come within your own knowledge, and 
that the pleadings contain much that you swear to on information and belief; which 
you merely swear that you believe to be true. But the exhibition of a forged bill 
of sale was a fact that must have come within his own knowledge, and, therefore, 
he swears not upon belief and information, so far as that fact is concerned. 

We presume we have said enough about the first two forged documents — the 
bill of sale and the T. O. Larkin letter — prepared and exhibited by our ^^ model" 
Mayor to defraud an old friend. 

The referees appointed by the court to determine this matter between the par- 
ties gave judgment against Wood for $5,635.40, on account of the barque fraud. 
Their report on the whole subject wUl be found in another part of this pamphlet. 

False, forged, and simulated Bills. 

We will now refer to the fraudulent, forged, altered, and simulated bills and 
youchers furnished Marvine by Mr. Wood, and which he. Wood, represented as 
true and correct. The account as made out by Wood had his signature appended 
to it, was in his own handwriting, and the amounts in it corroborated with the 
several fraudulent bills. The overcliarges or frauds in these bills or vouchers are 
specified in the report of the referees below. It is only necessary that we should 
refer more in detail to some of them, and to the testimony, in order that the people 
of thi^ city may understand more fully the rascality of their Mayor, who is again 
placed in nomuiation, and be prepared with substantial arguments compelling them 
to oppose his election. 

The frauds perpetrated by Wood respecting the purchases he made on account 
of the partnership, embrace that of altering the bills rendered by the merchants of 



TESTIMONY. 11 

whom he purchased. In some cases he increased the quantity of goods purchased, 
in others he added largely to their price. In many cases he perpetrated both these 
frauds in the same bill. In some cases he rendered bills to his partner for goods 
never purchased, to be shipped on the voyage, and which, of course, were never on 
board. In some cases, he would prevail on the merchant to make out his bill at 
prices which would afibrd a deduction of forty per cent for cash. On these bilU 
Wood would alter the 40 per cent into 10 per cent, thus increasing the cost of the 
goods to his partner 30 per cent, and reduciug the cost to himself the same amount. 
No plan of fraud and forgery that human ingenuity could devise seems to have been 
omitted b^' our ^^mockl'' Mayor, in his business affairs with his friend Marvine. 

When Wood discovered that Marvine had determined to call on the merchants 
of whom he purchased, to get evidence of the frauds he, Wood, had perpetrated, 
he travelled in advance of liim, and endeavored to induce the merchants to make 
out new bilLs, or to alter the charges by increasing them so as to correspond with 
the forged bills he had rendered Marvine. His usual story told the merchants in 
these cases, was, that he had much trouble in this matter, and the increased charges 
would no more than pay him for it. In mo-t cases the merchants refused to com- 
ply with his request, but in others he succeeded in procuring the altertitions, by 
deceiving the merchants as to his object. 

SoiiE Testimony on this Subject. 

Sidney WintHngham, s teslimony. — In 1S4S I was a dealer in cider, porter, ale, and wines. 1 
know Mr. Wood. On the 9th October, tS4S, I sold him a bill of cider, porter, and ale, amounting 
to $-4bo ; the terms were fix mouths. The bill as follows : 

luO cases cider at $2, $200 

100 " porter at $1.75, 175 

25 " aleat$1.75, 43 75 

25 " porter in pints at $2.50, '... 62 50 

Cartage, 3 75 

$4S5 00 
I was called on by Mr. "Wood to make an alteration in the charges. I declined doing so, and 
thought it objectioiiuble, and that I might be called in court, and it would not look well. Wood 
said that some one would call to get a copy of it. 

David L. Wintrin/;/iam'a testimony. — In 184S I was selling ale, porter, and cider. I was with 
iny brother, Siilney Wintringham. On the 9tb of October of that year, a .<ale was made to Mr. 
Wood. I have the book in which tlie sale was entered. The entry i.s in my brother's hand- 
■writing. The original amount was $4S5. At the request of Mr. Wood 1 made an alteration of 
that entry. lie wished mo to make it, and I think he wis present whtn I made it. He wished 
me to alter the cider from $2 to $2.25 per dozen, the porter from $1.75 to $2 per dozen, and the 
wine, pints from $1S to .$20,50. He said that some person miu'ht call for a bill, or a copy, and 
that he did not wish every one to know his business. It was a year after the purchase was made 
when Wood called to have the alterations made. 

John B. TTmrahy's testimom/. — My father was a rope manufacturer in Bushwick. and had an 
office in this city. I have uiy father's books here. There is an entry against Fernando Wood 
amounting to §910. Mr. Wood called at my fatlier's office, in reference to that bill, some time in 
the fall of IS49. He si)oke to me in relation to it. I do not remember the precise conversation, bat 
it was to the elfect that he had been to much trouble and expense in tilting i-ut and sending the 
barque John W. Cater, he should like to have us aid something to the amount of the bill, aboat 
10 per cent, I think, more th:in the fice of the bill then was. He said some one would call for a 
copy of the bill, and he wished me to di-liver the bill, when I had made the addition, to whoever 
should call for it. He asked that the a<1dition be made to the price per pound. I made out a bill 
in conformity with his request. I added one cent per pound to the amount stated in ttio original 
invoice, and cartage and e.'vpenses $12.50. the precise sums named by Wood. There was soma 
figuring, but Mr. Wood wished me to add about 10 per cent, and to do so the one cent a ponn4 
was added. I did just as he told me. 1 don't remember whether I delivered this altered bit) to 
any one, or whether 1 left It to be called for. 

In these two or three cases we see the ingenuity of the hero in this swindle. 
More than a year afterwards, when Marvine concluded to ferret out some of the 
frauds and forgeries of Wood, Wood starts in advance, calls on the merchants, and 
makes a desperate effort to get them to falsify their books, by altering the charges 
against hnn, and this, too, long after they were paid. He knew what the exact 
amount of fraud was in each case, and if he could only get the merchants to alter 
their books so as to correspond with the frauds and forgeries embraced in the bills 
he had rendered Marvine, and get them to deliver copies of these altered accounlSB 
to Marvine, or some one who called for them, at his request, he would still succeed 
in destroying the suspicions of Marvine as to the frauds he had perpetrated. W^ 



12 ALTERATIONS OF BILLS AND VOUCHEES. 

but Fernando "Wood could have devised this infamous method of covering up his 
frauds ? The report of the referees will show the exact amount of the frauds in the 
several bills and vouchers rendered by "Wood. 

We need only to refer more specifically to a few of them, in order to show the 
general and systematic fraud perpetrated. For a small bill of groceries purchased 
of John K. "Woolsey, of seven dollars and seventeen cents, he, "Wood, rendered a 
bill for $35.87, thus fraudulently obtaining $28.70, from Marvine. For another 
small biU of said "Woolsey, for fish and oil, of $9.85, he rendered a bill of $39.85, 
thus defrauding Marvine of $30.00, on this biU — making $58.70, on the two bills, 
which in the aggregate only amounted to $17.02. The fraud in these cases was 
near four times the amount of the true cost of the purchases. It was effected by 
adding to the bills 30 gallons of oil, and four kegs of lard, never purchased, and 
never put on board of the barque I The referees gave judgment against "Wood for 
the $58.70, on these two small bills. 

"Wood rendered bills to Marvine for work done to the barque long before he 
sold the one half of her to Marvine. He rendered a biU of Hagadorn & Elhot, for 
painting tlje barque, work done long before Marvine became part owner. The 
referees gave judgment against "Wood for this amount, $54.40. He rendered bills 
to Marvine for poultry, fresh beef, ducks, turkeys, eggs, oysters, pork, vegetables, 
tongues, cider, porter, lard, and other articles, which were never purchased, nor put 
■on board of the barque, and Marvine paid him the one half of these fradulent bills. 

In short, there is no other person inside or outside of the State prison, who has 
shown more ingenuity in altering bills than our model Mayor. As a specimen of 
shinplaster forgery, we give the foUowiug : S. Nichols sold "Wood the following 
biU: 

1 16-inch upper-box, leathered, .... $1 50 

2 " lower pump-boxes, ) 

stapled and nailed, ) .... 2 00 . 



$3 50 



Now, how do you think our model Mayor could convert this bill into one of 
;$36.50, instead of $3.50? "Why, we will tell you how. He forged a figure 6 
after the figure 1 in the first item in the biU. It then read $16.50, instead of $1.50 1 
He then forged a little cipher and placed it after the figure 2 in the second item, so 
that it read $20.00 instead of two dollars ! 

One more instance of his dexterity in mathematics, an example of which is not 
fbund in any of the ordinary works on that science, though it may be found among 
the combinations of figures in a lottery scheme. "Waydell & Co. had sold "Wood, 4 
•water-casks, for $12.00. Our Mayor's ingenuity soon magnified this $12 into $112. 
It would not do to make 4 water-casks cost $1 12, so he just innocently placed before 
the 4 a figure 3, which in the natural order of the digits should be placed there, 
and it, "WaydeD's bill, read 34 water-casks, wliich was no longer "WaydoU's bUl, but 
"Wood's bill ; and then just to show that 34 water-casks could not bo bought for 
$12, he placed another 1 beside "WaydeU's 1, when it read $112! 

No wonder our Mayor has got to be a rich man. His success disproves the 
general remark that mathematicians are always poor, because too much absorbed 
in figures to look to worldly matters. 

Still one more convmcing proof of our Mayor's capacity to mako large profits on 
a small capital. He was far too modest when he read that forged T. 0. Larkin 
letter to Marvine, in which $100,000 profit was promised on a shipment of $10,000 
worth of goods. "Wood actually made a profit of $100 on a bill of 75 cents, con- 
tracted for three cartages at 25 cents each. C. & R. PoUlon rendered to "Wood a 
bUl for sundry items and three cartages, at 25 cents each, carried out 75 cents. 
Wood just added, we suppose in his usual off-hand way in money-making, the 
words, "sundry spars," on the same luae with the "3 cartages," and just to have 
the price look business-like, prefixed to the figures $0.75 a 1 and a 0, which made it 
$100,751 Truly it is the easiest thing in the world to make a fortune, if you 
tmdorstand figures. If wo may rightly say that when we double the capital w© 
have invested we have made 100 per cent, profit, Wood in this instance made 
between 10,000 and 20,000 per cent. 



referees' report. 13 

The testimony of Mr. Dix, the son of John A. Dix, who was m Mr. ■Wood's 
employ at the time the accounts for the barque John "W. Cater were made out, 
swears that Mr. Wood wrote the heading of the invoice, and then handed him, the 
witness, the heading, and all the bills, books, and papers, which enabled him to 
make out the invoice. The invoice was made out by the witness from these bills 
and vouchers, and it amounted to $25,938.79, as stated in "Wood's letter to Mar- 
vino at the time. 

Of this amount "Wood purchased the following bills, and Marvine all the rest. 

wood's PUKCHASE3. 

James Hunter & Co., bill rendered, $504 35 

C. "W". Field, " 569 76 

Geo. S. Spall, " 210 00 

M.Q."Wood, " 675 83 

Wm. E. Lawrence, " 825 11 

Holt it Palmer, " 874 15 

8. Wintringham, " 578 75 

J. Thursby, " 1,000 67 

Charles Partridge, " 526 24 

Jacob Condit, " 697 83 

O. Van Every " 655 Tl 

James Moore, " 466 00 

K. Fish, " 110 00 

C. L. Insersoll, " 177 25 

Taggart & Gray, " 183 25 

Total, $7,540 00 

These bills all correspond with the invoice, as the invoice was made out from 
them in part, and they were all handed to young DLx by Mr. "Wood for that pur- 
pose. After this, "^^ood informed Marvine by letter, which we have pubhshed, of 
the exact amount of the cost of the cargo. "When Marvine came to this city, 
"Wood handed him all these bills for inspection, and Marvine had copies made of 
them before he returned them to "Wood. 

We will go no further into the details of these disgusting frauds. The following", 
report of the referees in the case, will give the amount in dollars and cents, 
as far as they investigated the subject. 

NEW-YORK SUPERIOR COURT. 



Henkt Sheldon, Geosqe E. Btxbie, William 
H. Sheldon, and Levi Chessutwood, 



Fernando "Wood. 



To the Justices of the Superior Court of the City ofJfeio- York : 

In pursuance of an order of this Court made in the above entitled action, bearing date the 
twenty-ninth day of November, in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-one, whereby it 
was referred to William M. Evarts. John Cochran, and Henry Hilton, of the city of New-York, 
counsoUors-at-law, to hear and determine this action, and to report thereon. 

We, the undersigned referees in the said order named, having been attended upon the reference 
herein by the counsel of the respective parties, and haviug heard their respective proofs and alle- 
gations, do report: 

That the following; facts were proven and established before us upon such reference. 

That on the secoird day of October, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, the defendant 
and one Edward E. Marvine made and entered into an asrreement, in writing, of which a copy, in- 
cluding the memorandum at the foot thereof, is annexed to the complaint herein, and marked 
Schedule A. 

That at the time of makina; such agreement, the defendant represented to said Marvine that the 
barque John W. Cater therein named should be contributed to said joint adventure at the cost 
price thereof which the defendant had paid therefor, and the defendant then agreed to sell to said 
Marvine, and the said Marvine then agreed to purchase of the defendant, one half of said barqno 
at such cost price. 

That the defendant thereupon represented such cost price to have been twelve thousand dollars, 
($12,000,) and said Marvine, believing such representation to be true, and upon the faith thereof; 
agreed to give the defendant for onehalf interest in such barque the sum of six thousand dollars, 
^6000,) specified in said agreement, marked Schedule A. 

That for five thousand dollars of said sum of six thousand dollars the said Marvine agreed to 
give the defendant, and the defendant agreed to accept of said Marvine, certain leasehold premises 
known as No. 3 Murray street, in the city of New-York, subject only to an incumbrance thereon 
of five thousand dollars, ($5000,) which the defendant was to assume. 



14 referees' report. 

That the cost price of said barque John "W. Cater to the defendant was not twelve thousand 
dollars, ($12,000,) but on the contrary was only four thousand dollars ($4000.) 

That saifl Marvine did not convey or transfer, or cause to be conveyed or transferred, to the de- 
fendant said leasehold premises number 3 Murray street, subject only to an incumbrance of five 
thousand dollars, ($5iJ00,) but, on the contrary, after the conveynnce and transfer thereof to the 
defendant in pursuance of the agreement aforesaid, he, the defendant, was obliged to and did pay, 
lay out, and expend in perfecting and making good the title to said jiremises so" transferred to him, 
the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars. ($15ij.) 

And also paid the sum of seventy-six dollars and twenty-one cents, ($76.21,)belug the taxes upon 
said premises for the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, (1848.) 

That the payment of said sum of one hundred and fifty dollars ($160) and said sum of seventy- 
six dollars and twenty-one cents ($76.21) were necessary and proper in order to vest in the defend- 
ant a title to said leasehold premises, subject only at the time of the transfer thereof to him to the 
said incumbrance of five thousand dollars. ($5000.) 

That on or about the twenty-first day of October, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, 
and within a few days after said barque had sailed from the port of New-York upon the joint ad- 
venture so agreed upon, the defendant rendered to said Marvine an account of expenditures made 
by the defendant under said agreement, marked Schedule A, in the fitting out of said vessel, and 
the purchase of her stores and supplies, and said Marvine, beheving such accoimt to be correct, did, 
on the seventh day of November, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eigiit, pay to the defend- 
ant one half thereof, pursuant to said agreement 

That in the account so rendered and paid were the following errors and overchai^es : 

HOWAED & WiNTEINQHAM: 

Overcharge, $300 00 

John R. 'Woolset : 

Overcharge, 5S 70 

Benjamin Hall &, Co. : 

Overcharge, 214 90 

C. M. HoLCOMB : 

Overcharge, 8 25 

J. W. Feeam : 

Overcharge, 54 50 

PooLK & Pentz : 

vercharge, 120 50 

Hagadorn & Elliott : 

Overcharge, 54 40 

F. Hennill : 

Overcharge, 11 00 

C. & Pv. POILLON : 

Overcharge, 100 00 

S. NicnoLLs : 

Overcharge, 38 00 

Waydell & Co. : 

Overcharge, 100 00 

C. L. "W ATKINS : 

Overcharge, 11 75 

E. FisK : 

Overcharge, 65 00 

Commissions: 

Overcharge, 46 60 

That at or about the time of rendering and settling the disbursement account last above stated, 
the defendant and said Marvine rendered to each other, and on the third day of January following 
settled between them, the account for purchases made by each pursuant to said original agreement 
marked Schedule A, for the cargo of said barque John \V. Cater. 

That upon such final settlement, the account set forth in complaint, and dated January 3, 1849, 
•was stated and signed by the parties, and such settlement was hiid by the defendant paying to the 
said Marvine the balance pf nine hundred and ninety-four dollars and five cents ($994.ii5i in the 
manner in said account specified, such payment heiiig necessary to equalize the said disburse- 
ments on account of such cargo, and thereby each contributed an equal half part of the cost 
thereof according to the accounts upon which such settlement was based. 

That in the account so rendered by the defendant to said Marvine for purchases made by the 
defendant for account of cargo of said barque John W. Cater as aforesaid, were the following er- 
rors and overcharges : 
Holt & Palmer: 

Overcharge, $100 00 

Tagqart & Grat : 

Overcharge 50 00 

Ctkus W. Field & Co. : iao no 

Overcharge, 1"0 00 

James Htotf.r & Co. : 

Overcharge, 102 79 

William E. Laurence : 

Overcharge, 236 00 

S. WlNTMNOnAM : 

Overcharge, 25 00 

E. Fish : 

Overcharge, 20 00 

M. Q. Wood : 

Overcharge, l ' o 84 



KEFEREES' EEPOKT. 15 

Oliver Yak Etert : 

Overcharge, 70 71 

John Thitesbv : 

Overcharge, 112 50 

An overcharge of interest, as follows : 

Interest on I2S26.04 of purchases made by defendant for cargo of said barque, 
actually made upon a credit of sis months, but in the account charged as 

ma<le for cash '. 203 91 

Interest on $446 of similar purchases actually made upon a credit of sis 
months, but in the account charged as made upon a credit of four months,. 5 20 

That each and all such errors and overcharges have been discovered by said Marvine since the 
settlement of said disbursements and cargo accounis, and that the payment by him to the defend- 
ant of an equal half part of all the items above enumer.Ued. except the overcharge of interest last 
mentioned, and as to that, the payment of the whole thereof, was made upon the accounts of the 
same rendered by the defendant to said Marvine as aforesaid, and upon the faith and credit of said 
Marvine that said accounts so rendered were correct. 

That said errors and overcharges, exclusive of said overcharge of interest, in the asgregate 
amount to two thousand two humlred and thirty-one dollars and forty-nine cents, ($'22:51.49.) "one 
half thereof being one thousand one hundred and fifteen dollars and seventy-four cents, (.|1115.T4,) 
and the interest upon said one half from the respective times of the payment thereof by said Mar- 
vine to the defendant, as hereinbefore stated, to the date of this report, amounts to five hundred 
and sixty-one dollars and feventy-seven cents. (f.'iGl.r?.) 

That such overcharge of interest amounts in the whole to two hundred and nine dollars and 
cloven cents, ($2iii).ll.) and the interest thereon from the time of the payment thereof by said 
Marvine to the defend.ant, as hereinbefore stated, (namely, the 3d day of January, 1S49,) to the 
date of this report, amounts to one hundred and four dollars and seven cents. ($104.o7.) 

That the ditference between the one half of the actual cost price of the said barque, John W. 
Cater to the defendant, and the sum which said Marvine paid tlie defendant therctor upon the re- 
presentation that she cost twelve thousand dollars. ($12,000,) Is four thousand dollar.^, ($400(1.) 

That deducting therefrom the sums paid by the defendant as above stated for perfictini: the title 
to, and removing liens upon, said lea.seiiold premises number 3 Murray street, leaves the sum of 
three thousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and twenty-nine cents, ($3773.29.) 

Interest upon s;dil sum of three thousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and twenty- 
nine cents, (^3773.29,) fnmi the twenty-sixth day of January, 1S49. the day the said Marvine 
transferred said leiis.-hold premises to the defendant, to the date of this report, amounts to one 
thousand eight hundred and sixty-two dollars and eleven cents, ($1SC2 11.) 

On or about the 7th day of November, 1S49, and prior to the commencement of this action, the 
said Marvine duly assigned and transferred to the plaintiffs herein all claims and demands which 
the said Marvine had against the defendant arising out of sai<l adventure, or the purchase of the 
said b.irque John W. Cater, or tlie disbursement or cargo account of the same, or said agreement^ 
of whii^h a copy is annexed to the complaint herein, and marked Schedule A 1. 

We do further report rvs a conclusion of law upon the facts so found, 

First, That the plaintiffs are entitled to recover of and from the defendent, the difference between 
the one h.alf of the actual cost price paiii by the defendant for said barque John W. Cater, and the 
sum which said Marvine paid the defendant for said one half, less the sums so paid by the defend- 
ant for perfecting the title to, and removing the liens upon, said le,isehold premises, namely, the 
sura of three tliousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and twenty-nine cents, ($3773.29,) 
with one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two do lars and eleven cents, ($1802.11, > being the 
interest thi-reon from the twenty-sixth day of January, 1S49, as above stated, in the whole amount- 
ing to five thousand six hundred and thirty-five dollars and forty cents, ($5635.40.) 

Second, That the plaintiffs are entitled to recover of and from the defendant the said one half 
part of said errors and overcharges above ennmera;ed, amounting to one thousand one hundred 
and fifteen dollars and seventy-four cents, ($1115.74,) with five hundred and sixty-one dollars and 
seventy-seven cents, ($561.77,) being the interest thereon to the date hereof, from the times 
said Marvine paid the pame to the defendant as atiove stated, in the whole amounting to one thou- 
sand six hundred and seventy-seven dollars and dfty-one cents, ($1677.51.) 

Third, That the pliiintitfs are entitled to recover of and from the defendant for said overcharge 
of Interest above specified, the sum of two hundred and nine dollars and eleven cents, ($2u9.11,) 
with one hundred and four dollars and seven cents, ($Ui4.07,) beins the interest thereon to the date 
hereof from the time the said Marvine paid the .same to the defendant as above stated, in the whole 
amounting to three hundred and thirteen dollars and eighteen cents, ($313.18.) 

Finallyr That the plaintiffs are entitled to payment herein against the defendant for the sum of 
seven thousand six hundred and twenty-sis dollars and nine cents, c7629.09.> 

And we do further certify and report. 

First, That no sufficient tender by the defendant to said Marvine was proven before ns to have 
been at any time made respecting the subject-matter of this action. 

Second, That upon such reference the defendant introduced, subject to the plaintiffs' objection 
and to our final determination in respect thereto, evidence respecting the following item.s, which 
items be claimed should be allowed to him as an offset against any claim of the plaintilEs in this 
action, namely: 

One half of the sum psid by the defendant to one Kent for a gold-tester, $5 50 

Two certain notes of Marvine in favor of one Barney, paiii by defendant, 25 00 

One half of certain sums paid by defendant to one Capt Stephen Camack, 320 00 

This sum charged to the defendant fir the compensation of A. G. Marvine, as supercargo, 

and paid out of defendant's share of the return of the adventure, 850 Oo 

This sum charged to defendant tor insurance on the returns of the adventure, and paid out 

of the defendant's share of the returns of the adventure, 501 90 

Third, That prior to making this our report, we determined that all saoh items should be dU' 



16 wood's defense. 

allowed, and the evidence in respect thereto should be rejected, because no sufficient set-off or 
counter-claim had been set forth in the defendant's answer herein, and the pleadings presented no 
iBBue In respect thereto. 
All of whici is respectfully submitted. 

Wm. M. Evabtb, 
John Cochrah, 
Hbnrt Hilton. 
Hcw-YoBX, Jouvuary IZth, 1856. 

(Copy.) 



WOOD'S DEFENSR 

Now, the reader would naturally inquire what was the nature and character of 
the defense our Mayor would resort to in this case. It was scarcely to have been 
supposed that his ingenuity was insufficient in getting up some kind of defense. 
He who could manufacture a forged letter, and a forged bill of sale, and render so 
many fraudulent bills and vouchers to his partner, could not certainly content him- 
self without an attempt to show that no such crimes had been perpetrated. 

He assumed the ground that these charges of fraud were untrue, and that all the 
overcharges in his bills were errors. To give coloring to his assumption of integ- 
rity, he further asserted that Marvine participated in making up the accounts ol 
the barque, and to him, therefore, the alleged errors should at least in part be attri- 
buted. The ground was taken by the defense that Marvine had called at Wood's 
store, a day or two after the barque sailed, and, together with a boy in Wood's 
employ, made up the ship's accounts, in which the alleged errors were discovered 
afterwards by Marvine, and for which the referees have given judgment against 
Wood. 

This line of defense was ingenious, and necessarily gave Marviae much trouble 
to show its falsity. The barque had sailed on the 19 th of October ; and now how 
was Marvine to show that he had notliing to do with making up the ship's accounts, 
and thus completely destroy this species of defense on the part of Wood ? The 
facts of the case were that Marvine was in Auburn when the barque sailed, and 
for several consecutive days after, and, therefore, could not have participated in 
making up the accounts of the barque in Wood's store in New- York, which were 
made up on the 21st of October, two days after the barque had sailed. A state- 
ment of these accounts was rendered to Marvine at Auburn, by Wood, in Wood's 
own handwritmg, having his own proper signature to it, and dated on the 21st of 
October. 

Wood had purchased all the ship's stores, supplies, and outfits of the bojque, 
amounting, as he stated, to $3,590.66. The cargo on board the barque cost 
$25,939.11, making together $29,529.77. Of the cargo Marvine had purchased to 
the amount of $18,399.11, and Wood to the amount, as he alleged, of $7,540.00, 
together making the cargo cost $25,939.11. 

Now, in the purchases by Marvine, of over $18,000 worth of the cargo, no errors, 
overcharges, or frauds existed. But in Wood's purchases, of about $7,500 worth 
of the cargo, and the whole of the outfits, about $3,500, making together $11,130.66, 
all the frauds, errors, or overcharges existed. If Marvine had really partici- 
pated in making up the ship's accounts, and was thus responsible in part for the 
alleged errors, it is singular that they should all have been against himsehj and 
that he should have managed so as to alter bills and vouchers, in almost every 
case, so as to vsTong himself in the aggregate out of thousands of dollars. We say 
such a state of facts would be almost miraculous. If he had such a penchant for 
cheating himself, why did he not do it in some of the bills he had purchased on ac- 
covint of the barque ? 

Although no sensible business man would attach the least credit to such a de- 
fense on the part of Wood, even were there no other proof of its absurdity, yet it bo 
happened, that Marvine had the most unquestionable proof that he had no agency 
in making up the ship's accounts, was not in this city when they were made up, 
and that he received a copy of the accounts, made up in Wood's own handw r itin, 
directed to him at Auburn, dated the 21st day of October, two days after the barque 
had sailed. The following is a copy of the outfit account, all of which was pur 



wood's defense, 17 

chased by Wood, and the original is in his own handwriting, and waa sent to Mar* 
vine in Auburn on the 21st day of October: 

Babqdb John W. Cater, 

To Fexnando Wood, Dr. 

Oct. 1848. 

To Cash, Steamboat U. States and pilot, $13 00 

" Howard & Wintringham— ato's, 430 66 

" Board of Surveyors, 12 00 

" Thomas Ritter — medicines, 12 93 

" Bliss & Creighton — compasses, 5 50 

•' John R. WooUey — provisions, 307 26 

" Howard & Wintringham — oil, Ac, 12 81 

" A. J. Horton— wood, &c., 25 50 

" C. M. Holcomb- flour, &c., 14 75 

" Advertising and papers, 18 25 

" M. Trappel— wharfage, . 00 S3 

♦' Benjamin Hall & Co. — stores, 214 90 

" M. Tallant— watching, 4 63 

" J. Macey — blacksmith, 12 02 

" Jno. W. Terans — poultry, &c., 54 50 

" Jno. Ferguson — coal, &c., 5 00 

" R. v. W. Thorne— wharfage, 6 00 

" Pool & Pentz— cash to crew 120 60 

" J. Ellis — marine survey, 10 00 

" A. W. Rogers — ship keeping, 2 25 

•' J. L. Sandford &, Co.— bread, 130 92 

♦' Hagadorn & Elliott — painting, 54 45 

" R. C. Wetmore & Co.— crockery, 13 9T 

. " John Mason & Co. — labor, >tc., 102 56 

" Ackerly — potatoes, 23 52 

" 0. Van Every — caboose, 49 76 

" Williams & Hinmore— ship ch'd'y, 224 84 

" Hemmingway & Beveridge — sails, 396 61 

" G. Van Deusen — filling , x 25 40 

" Pilotage, 10 50 

*' O. Van Every— stove fixtures, 3 00 

' P. Humill— board bill, 11 00 

' Fulton-street Tea Store, IS 05 

' John R. Woolsey — groceries, 35 ST 

' C. & R. Poillon — repairs and spars, 188 09 

Advanced to Cook, 26 00 

'• S. Caiid'er — survey certificate, 7 50 

" C. L. Inger^rU— boat, 33 25 

" S. Nicholls— puu..->- gear, &c., 86 50 

«' Wagdell & Co.— casks, c'p'ge, &c., 152 37 

" Wm. Frost— wharfage, 7 87 

" F. Humill — advanced to crew, 222 25 

" C. L. Walker— boxes, 11 75 

«« R. Hoyt— cash,&c., ■. 82 50 

" Thompson — Brooklyn wharfage, 5 00 

«» S. Tallant— watching, 16 25 

" J. R. Woolsey— fish, &c., 39 85 

•• K. Fish— boats, 65 00 

•' W. Cain— poultry, &c., 32 20 

" T. P. Cowen— rigging, &c., 75 08 

" Daniel Coger — ship-joiner, 31 24 

'• Custom-House — clearances & c't'ges, 53 85 

To com. and advancing $3,4S6 64, 174 33 

$3,660 97 

Error in Bill, November 25, 20 11 

$3,640 86 
New-York, October 21st, 1S4S. 

Febnando Wood. 

Deduct on filling first page, 10 20 

$3,630 66 

Deduct, 40 00 

$3,590 66. 
On the day preceding the date of this account, that is, on the 20th of October, the 
day after the barque sailed, "Wood wrote Marvine at Auburn as follows : 

New- York, Oct. 20, 1843. 
Ed. E. Mabvine, Esq., Auburn : 

Mt dear Sir : I regret exceedingly to learn from Mr. Smyth that Mrs. Marvine continues quite 
ill, 80 much so as to prevent your leaving her. I eincerely hope she will be much better before 

2 



18 THE T. O. LAEKIN FOEGED LETTER ONCE MOKE. 

the receipt of this. I wrote you some days ago that the barque was insured. I attended to that, 
and have your policy, which will be handed to you on your return. She sailed yesterday, at 10 
o'clock A. M., with an exceedingly fine and fair wind, with the most favorable prospects. Your 
brother and Mr. Richardson went on board in exultant spirits, full of hope for a successful result. 
We have been exceedingly fortunate in all things, except passengers. Our passage-money 
amounts to but $250, and freight-money to $511, total $701. What the expense of outfits will 
be I can't tell yet, until all the bills are received, but they are very heavy. We found that as it 
is our intention to run the vessel on the Pacific coasts for some time, and disbursements and pro- 
visions would be so high there, that it was necessary to lay in a very large supply to last a long 
time. From present indications the outfits wUl amount to over .$3,U00. It may be several hun- 
dred dollars over that sum. 

The exact amount of invoice of our goods is $25,939 11, which is all well insured, and 20 per 
cent added . The whole accounts and papers were made up by Mr. Sheldon's nephew. I thought 
in your absence it might be more satisfactory to you. He arranged all the bills and papers. 
When we meet, the whole matter will be talked over. There is nothing now requiring your pre- 
sence here appertaining to our business. 

Very truly yours, Febnando Wood. 

Here we see by this letter, that "^''ood informed Marvine the exact amount of the 
cost of the cargo, $25.939.11 ; and stated that the outfits would be over $3,000, 
and several hundred dollars over that sum. Ou the very next day he sends the 
exact amount. 

Now, what l^ecomes of the defense that Marvine was at "Wood's store in New- 
York, at the very time when Wood was daily writing to him at Auburn ? He 
wrote him at Auburn almost daily for several consecutive days. Marvine proved 
that he was in Auburn daily, from the time the barque sailed, on the 19th of 
October, until the 28th of the same month. He proved tliis by several persons in 
Auburn, with whom he transacted business on those days. Here, then, we see the 
strongest proof that ho had no agency in making out the ship' s accounts, in which 
so many frauds have been proven to exist. When Wood swore that Marvine par- 
ticipated in making out these accounts, he swore to what was not tme, and what 
he knew was false. 

When Marvine arrived in this city, which he did about the 1st of November, 
Wood handed him the bUls and vouchers of the outfit account of the barque, 
which bills and vouchers corresponded with the account he had sent Marvine at 
Auburn, on the 21st of October. Marvine, believing that all was correct, after com- 
paring the bills and vouchers with the account as sent him by Wood, settled by 
paying Wood the one half of it, or $1795.33. Before Marvine returned the bills 
and vouchers to Wood, suspicions began to be entertained that he had been 
defi^auded, and he, therefore, had copies of the bills and vouchers made, and these 
copies compared with the originals by a mercantile friend, who put his initials on 
them, and they were produced on the trial. Wood never produced on the trial 
the original bills, on which Marvine had settled the account with him. Probably, 
like his bank-book years before, they had l^een burned up in some fire that occur- 
red ! Why did he not produce them? Ah I he was not disposed to show the 
referees that he had altered those bills, and that they were thus no longer the bills 
as made out by the merchants of whom he had purchased goods for tlie barque. It 
was the frequent interhneations and alterations in those bills and vouchers, that 
gave Marvine suspicions that ho had been defrauded ; so before he returned them 
to Wood he had copies taken. 

THE T. 0. LAEKIN FORGED LETTER ONCE MORE. 

The defense as to this forged document, was of a character to show the villainy 
of Wood in as bold and prominent a view as the forged document itself, and the evi- 
dence in relation to it. What do you imagine was the character of Wood's defense 
on this point of the case ? After some foui or five witnesses, all of the highest 
character as respects veracity and integrity, had jjworn, on the part of the plantifl's, 
that Wood did exhibit to Marvine and to them, sucli a letter as has been described, 
purporting to have been received from Thos. 0. Larkin, a government agent in 
California, and that they read it, or portions of it, and heard it read by Wood, he, 
Wood, saw the necessity of counteracting the effect of this testunony. As tliis T. 
0. Larkin appeared on the stand himself, and swore that he had never written to 
Wood, and did not even know him at the time the forged letter was written, an 
effort must be made by Wood to confound and to confute the witnesses who sworo 



OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PKETENSES. 19 

that he showed them such a letter. This effort was made. "Wood succeeded in 
finding a man who had been in California-, named Thos. S. Larkins ; not a govern- 
ment agent, it is true, but an Englishman, who came to California from China, in 
1849. Wood very naturally supposed that if he could forge a letter puq^orting to 
come from this Larkins, resembling much the other forged letter, purporting to have 
been received from Thos 0. Larkin, and then show this to the witnesses on the 
stand, who swore that he had exhibited the first forged document, he would force 
them to hesitate whether this last forgery was not the document they had seen 
him exhibit to Marvine. If a letter is sliowu to a person, signed, as he believes, by 
Thos. 0. Larkin, he would naturally hesitate, a year or more afterwards, when a 
similar letter in appearance is laid before him signed Thos. S. Larkins, to say that 
it might not be the same, unless he judges from the contents, or some other cir- 
cumstance except the signature. 

But happily for the cause of truth and justice, this last forgery of our " model " 
Mayor was fuU as bunglingly committed as the first. The plantiffs brought on the 
stand a witness, a Capt. Fraser, who knew this Thos. S. Larkins, and had corre- 
sponded with him ; and he swore that he was not in California at the date of this 
letter which Wood pretended to have received from him ; and that his name was 
Larkins, and not Larkiu ; that the middle letter was .9., and not 0. He knew the 
writing of this Thos. S. Larkins, who was an Englishman, and showed some letters 
from him. When the handwriting of this Thos. S. Larkins, in possession of 
the witness, was compared with that in the ibrged letter Wood pretended to have 
received from him, they were about as dissimilar as the ancient Egyptian hierogly- 
phics, and that style of hand we see in the copy-books used in the scliools of the 
present day. Thus it was shown that our "model" Mayor had been trying his 
hand at forgery again. Tie got most beautifully caught. When the case was 
summed up, the plantiffs' counsel called the attention of the referees to the hand- 
writing in this forged letter, and to that in the papers before them, kno-nm to be in 
"Wood's liand. The similarity was perceptible, though an attempt to disguise was 
evident in the forged document. All was solemn and silent when tlie counsel 
showed the identity of the handwriting in the two cases, the one a forged paper, 
and the other admitted to bo the handwriting of Fernando Wood 1 

Thus we see the defense in this case did nothing but multiply the frauds and 
crimes of the defendant, Wood. His forgeries became more numerous and appa- 
rent as the defense proceeded. Reader, shall wo re-elect this man Mayor of o'lr 
city? 



WOOD INDICTED FOR OBTAINING M3NEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES! 
HE PLEADS THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS! 

The People against .Yf.'k^x'svio Wood. 

On the 7th of November, 1851, the Grand Jury of this city found a bill of indict- 
ment against Fernando Wood for the alleged offen.se of obtaining money under 
false pretenses. But it so happened that the offense for which he wa.s indicted 
nad been committed three years previously, on the 7lh day of Xovember, 1848. 
The Revised Statutes, in reference to the offense of obtaining money iinder false 
pretenses, etc., enacts that the indictment shall be found and filed in court within 
three years after the commission of the offense. In this indictment against Wood, 
if the day on which the offense had been committed was included, tbree years had 
elapsed. Wood plead this statute, so as to avoid an investiyration of the matter. 
The case came before the then Recorder, and as there was some doubt as to what 
his decision would be, means were to be used to have it favorable to Wood. It 
was all-important to Mr. Wood that no investigation of the case should take place. 
Of course no innocent man, charged with such a crime, would desire to avoid an 
investigation ; but would rather court a full hiquiry into the matter, so that he 
could be honorably discharged, and all suspicions removed. Bu* his was not the 
view taken by our "model" Mayor. The Recordei^'s decision p d, and it was 

favorable to Wood. The decision was tiiat tne three year.* ed, that th' 

day on which the alleged offense had been committed mut ded 'i cf th« 



20 OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PEETENSES. 

puting the time that had elapsed ; and he, therefore, granted the motion to quaah 
the indictment. 

This decision of the Recorder is reported in full in the New- York Legal Observer, 
published in this city ; and its correctness or incorrectness is a matter about which 
•we have nothing to say. We simply assert the facts of the case as they occurred. 
The accused evidently had some doubt as to what the decision would be, and he, 
therefore, very probably reflected upon the plan, which in his judgment, was the 
best to secure a favorable one. We say this much in anticipation of giving our 
reasons for saying it. Now for the facts of the case, and then we will leave the 
reader to judge whether we have insinuated unjustly. There is one important 
circumstance connected vrith this case, or one which we will connect with it, that 
deserves to be mentioned, and then the reader may draw his own inference from it. 

A FIVE HUNDRED DOLLAR CHECK. 

Within a day or two of the very time the Recorder gave his decision to quash 
the indictment, Wood's check for $500 was drawn, payable to the Recorder. It 
was cashed by a broker in this city, to whom it was presented for that purpose by 
the Recorder in person. Now, what is there wrong in this ? We see nothing 
worthy of comment, in the simple fact tliat the Recorder should have had Wood's 
check for $500, and should get the cash for it. But as the newspapers of that 
day had much to say about this indictment, and the decision of the Recorder, the 
broker who cashed the check could not help his attention being directed to the 
two facts — the decision to quash the indictment and the five hundred dollar check, 
both of which facts occurred about the same time. The unfortunate circumstance 
is, the simultaneous occurrence of these two facts. This is what compelled the 
broker to give the subject more thought than he gave to paying a check ordi- 
narily. 

How, then, shall we ascertain whether the fact that Wood's check for five 
hundred dollars, given to the Recorder at this unfortunate time, was or was not a 
business transaction, entirely disconnected with the indictment case, and not in- 
tended by Wood to influence the decision of the Recorder ? There is no doubt of 
the fact, that the check was paid the Recorder. It was drawn on the Citizens' 
Bank, cashed by a well-known and responsible broker, a man who is respected by 
all who know him. Now, it so happens that a denial by Wood and the Recorder 
that such a check ever existed, would bo very strong proof that it was given for 
corrupt purposes. A ssuming that the clieck was given and paid precisely as we 
have stated, and that the transaction was a perfectly legitimate and honorable one, 
none of the parties would wish to deny it. But if they do deny it, then, upon 
proof that the transaction did occur, as we have stated, it is a very strong pre- 
sumption that the transaction was a corrupt one. 

Both Wood and the Recorder have denied that such a check was ever given. 
The Recorder went so far in his denial as to commence a suit for Ubel against one 
or more of the daily papers of this city for having stated the fact of such a check 
having been given and cashed. But he never intends to have the suit tried. We 
have in our possession his denial of the existence of such a check over his own 
signature, which is to our mind the strongest kind of proof it was drawn by Wood 
to influence the Recorder in the indictment case referred to ; and that the intention 
on the part of Wood was corrupt. 

There is still other evidence to show corruption, and an attempt to bribe tho 
court. It is usual to employ a third party to negotiate bargains of this character. 
So it was in this case. From that party the facts we have stated were first learned. 
Then these facts were corroborated by the broker himself who cashed the check. 

Such are the circumstances connected with the indictment case of Fernando 

Wood for obtaining money under false pretenses. He was indicted. He avoided 

an investigation of the case by pleading the statute of limitations. He paid the 

, Recorder $500 about the time that magistrate decided that the plea was a gopd 

'^ne, and that the indictment must be quashed. Reader, draw your own ia- 

effofencea I 



KNOW-NOTHINGISM. 21 

WAS OR WAS NOT OUH "MODEL" MAYOR A KNOW-NOTHING ?- HIS 
OATH - COUNTER AFFIDAVITS AND STATEMENTS. 

It is alleged that for many months preceding the election of 1854. Mayor Wood 
was a member of the American Order, or the association known as Know- 
Nothings. He joined the order in the twenty-second ward, though he attended its 
meetings in all parts of the city. He very frequently travelled with James W. 
Barker, a candidate for the Mayoralty at the same election, and the nominee of the 
order for that oflice. Wood and Barker were both candidates for nomination by 
the order, though Barker beat Wood in the contest. Wood was a member of the 
executive council of the order that nominated Barker for Mayor. He was one of 
those selected to inform his brother Barker that he was nominated. 

After Barker was nominated, Fernando Wood saw that he had no longer any 
hope of being the nominee of the Know-Nothings as a party. He, therefore, went 
to work secretly to produce dissension in the order, with a view to draw ofl' a part 
of the voters to his own support. It will be remembered that soon after Barker 
■was nominated. Wood got the nomination of both sections of the Democracy. 
Tammany Hall nominated him without much of a struggle, and the Hards, who as- 
sembled at the Stuyvesant Institute, had a close contest in their convention. But 
Wood had used his money freely, had purchased the support of many members of 
the convention, and had aciroitly managed to get others elected to the convention 
whom ho could control. He, theretbre, was by a majority of some one or two de- 
clared the nominee of the Hard Democracy for the mayoralty. 

But as the contest neared, many members of the Democratic party became 
alarmed on account of the apparently well-founded assertions in the public papers, 
and in political circles, that Wood was a member of the Know-Nothing order. He 
"was called upon by committees and by individuals to ascertain the truth of these 
assertions. He, of course, positively denied that he was a member of the order. 
But so strong was the beUef that his denial was false that many insisted that he 
should make the denial over his own signature, and cause it to be pubhshed in the 
papers. Not tlie least alarmed about putting his name to a falsehood, in order to 
win support, he consented at once, and the following card made its appearance in 
the public papers. It was addressed to M. Doheny, Esq., one of our Irish citizens, 
who somewhat doubted on the question of Wood's Know-Nothingism : 

[Copy.] New-York, OctoberZ\, 1S51 

Dear Sib : In reply to your inquiries respecting tBe truth of the statement made in one of the 
newspapers of thia city to the effect that I am a member of the order u Know-Nothicgs, I state 
that there is no truth in it whatever. I am not a member of any secret society whatever. 

Very truly yours, Fernando Wood. 

M. Doheny, Esq. 

Still thousands would not believe this card. They would be satisfied with no- 
thing short of the affidavit of Wood that lie was not a member of the order. He 
was told that he must make an affidavit to that effect, or he would be opposed. 
Finding himself pressed on all sides upon the suliject, and being nothing daunted 
at the crime of perjury, he made an affidavit, which we publish. He made several 
of the same kind, and swore to them before different commissioners, so as to remove 
the suspicions of several committees and individuals who called upon him. The 
result of all this was, that he succeeded in inducing many to beUeve that he was 
not, nor never had been, a Know-Nothiog. Hundreds, however, knew better. 
Though he had the nomination of both sections of the Democratic party, he did not 
get their united support by many thousands. 

That his affidavit denying membership of the order was false, may be proven by 
another affidavit of four respectable members of tiie order, who swore positively 
that he was a member. Their oaths were taken about four days after that of Mayor 
Wood. We give both affidavits. 

AFFIDAVIT OP FERNANDO WOOD. 

City and Countt op New -York. I- ««. 

Fernando Wood, of the city of New- York, being duly sworn, doth depose and say that the 
(tatement made this day in The Sunday IHspatch, that he is a member of the order of KnoW' 



22 DISGUSTING STOKY ABOUT A CATHOLIC PKIEST, 

Nothings is absolutely and unqualifiedly false, and further that he is not a member of any secret 
order or society whatever except the Tammany Society or Columbian Order ; and further, that he 
holds no political principles antagonistic to those of the great Democratic party of this Union ; and 
further this deponent saith not. (.Signed) Fernando Wood. 

Sworn before me this 29th day of I 
October, A.D. 1854 j 

M. DiEFENDOBF, Commissioner of Deeds. 

THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT OF FOUR RESPECTABLE MEN DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING 

THE ABOTE. 
The undersigned, being duly sworn, do severally swear and declare that they are personally ac- 
quainted with the Hun. Fernando Wood, and have been so acquainted for suine time past, and of 
our own knowledge, do say that be has been for some months past a member of an order known and 
designated as " Know-Nothings ;" and, furthermore, that he was a member of the Executive Coun- 
cil of the same order, who made the nomination for Mayor at its recent session, and was himself 
a candidate for that position, and his friends personally solicited our votes and sui)port for that 
oflSce for him, but failed to secure a sufficient number of votes to etfect the purpose. 

(Signed) Theo. G. Chambers, G. C, 2d Ward, City New-York. 
E. W. Spaulding, Member Com. 4th Ward Council. 
H. Fakkinoton, 9th Ward. 
EoBBET S. Dixon, 9th Ward. 
Sworn to before me this ) 
2d day of Nov., 1854. ( 

W. F. T. Chapman, Com. of Deeds. 

[Copy.] 

That he had been a memloer of the order is a flict beyond dispute, and is not now 
denied even by his friends. Those who Avish to show that the Mayor did not swear 
, false, say that he had withdrawn from the order. It is stated upon pretty good 
authority, that he induced a man by the name of Fergussoio, a member of the order 
to whicli Wood belonged, and its secretary, to give him a certificate of withdrawal, 
and not to note the foct on the books of tlie order, or report it to its members. 
Wood cotild thus hold this certificate and continue his member-ship or not as he 
chose. This same Fergusson was afterwards appointed to a public office through 
Wood's influence. Prominent members of the order are perfectly familiar with 
these facts. 

It is also asserted by good authority, that he became a member of the order in 
another ward, while he held this certificate of withdrawal from his friend Fergtosson, 
a member of the order in the 22d ward, lie then joined the Allen branch of the 
order, in wliich he had some friends. It is probably a fact 'tliat he never did with- 
draw from the order, but merely held a certificate of withdrawal, obtained in the 
way we have described. Under any circumstances of the case, view it in whatever 
light we may, his oath was intended to deceive. The certificate of withdrawal that 
he induced Fergusson to give him was obtained, it is said, after he had sworn 
he was not a member. 

Such is a sample of the trickery of a candidate for the Mayoralty of this city. 
What high-minded or honorable man would descend to such mean practices? If 
he withdrew for the purpose of deceiving those who insisted that tliey could not 
support him, unless he would remove the prejudices against him on account of his 
supposed membership of a secret order, to tlie principles of which they were op- 
posed, and again he became a member, the fraud is stUl worse. 

But what cares Fernando Wood about the commission of perjury ? It is a crime 
that he is familiar witli, as we have shown in the preceding pages of this pamph- 
let. From his very boyhood he has been premeditating fraud. 



A DISGUSTING STORY ABOUT A CiTHOLIC PRIEST, AS TOLD BY OUR " MODEL " 
MAYOR AT THE MEETINGS OF THE ORDER, 

"We have in our possession two affidavits from highly respectable citizens, members 
of the Know-Nothing order, from which it appears that om- Mayor was quite a 
" spouter," at the meetings of the order, and irom his first attendance seemed to 
be particularly desirous to show his utter contempt for the Irish, and more specially 
for the Catholic priesthood. He invented, no doubt, a vulgar story, describing a 
dirty trick he once played upon a Catholic priest in the interior of Pensylvaniai and 
upon a poor Irish lady who gave him shelter for the night. 



THE BANK TEANSACTION". 23 

It appears from this story, that our " model " Mayor was travelling on foot in 
the interior of Pennsylvania, and had become much fatigued, as night approached. 
In this condition he visited the humble cottage of an Irish woman, at whose 
house there lodged for that night a Catholic priest. Young "Wood asked for 
a night's cntertaiiiment, when the woman replied that she had but one spare bed 
m the house, and that was occupied by a Catholic priest. She eyed him closely, 
rather regretted that she could not accommodate Mm, as he appeared much exliaust- 
ed, and there was no public house within some mUes. Her humanity finally 
induced her to say to Mr. Wood, that if he would occupy the same bed as the priest, 
he might be accommodated. He very cheerfully consented, and entered the humble 
dwelling of the Catholic Irish woman. Like most rude and primitive houses in the 
backwoods, a small ladder conducted you through a hole in the ceiUng to the 
chamber, where slept the priest. Wood retired to bed. 

He relates what then happened, which is entirely too disgusting for publication. 
Our Mayor says he had an urgent caU to get up and go out in the night, and did 
not like to crawl down the ladder, or to alarm the woman of the house. So he 
quietly relieved himself by drawing towards him the under garment of the priest. 
In the morning he says ho complained bitterly to the priest, of the disagreeable 
condition of the bed. Appearances indicated that the priest had been unfortunate, 
and he begged of his companion Wood, to make no remarks to the landlady, but 
leave that to him, and he would make it all right. 

• This disgusting story, purely and wholly manufactured, an impudent falsehood 
no doubt. Wood related with such embellishments as he was capable of^ at nearly 
all the meetings of the Know-Nothmgs ho attended. He told the story from the 
Battery to Harlem, and in presence of hundreds of persons. We have the affida- 
vits of two respectable persons, that they heard him teU the story repeatedly. 
There arc hundreds who could make a similar affidavit. The fact is iucUsputable. 
His object was to show his detestation of the religion of the Catholics, and show, 
if he was elected Mayor, the earnestness of his convictions of the truth of the 
Know-Nothing principles. 

But a few days after he last related this vulgar story before an assembly of 
Know-Xothings, he swore that he was not a member of the order! Was there 
ever a greater scamp than this same Fernando Wood ? If it had been true as he 
related the story, he was a disgusting brute, who after having been kindly provided 
for by a stranger, put to bed in decent company, perpetrated a dirty trick, too 
filthy for description. We scarcely know which is the worst, the perjury, or the 
relation of the disgusting story. Both of them are filustrative of the true charac- 
ter of our Mayor. Reader, this is the man who swore that he was not a member 
of the order of Know-Nothings 1 



THE BANK TRANSACTION-A S1750 FEAUD! 

The history of this case is one well calculated to show the true character of Fer- 
nando Wood in business life. The atrocity of the fraud upon the Merchants' Ex- 
change Bank can be appreciated by business men. Simply overdrawing on a bank 
is not criminal. It is a thmg very frequently done. But where a man finds that 
a bank has placed to his credit a large amount of money which he knows he never 
deposited, and he draws this money out by several small checks, in a short time, 
and then closes his business with the bank, and his bank-books and check-books 
get burned up, the thing looks mysterious, and the common sense of the world 
will say that a fraud was perpetrated. 

The facts in this case are simply these: In April, 1836, Fernando Wood opened 
an account with the Merchants' Exchange Bank of this city. His several deposits 
in the bank were small, varying from $96.88 to $349.42. He never bad $400 in 
the bank at any one time. In November, some seven or eight months after he 
opened his bank account, a clerk of the bank, through a mistake, placed to Mr. 
Wood's credit a check on a bank in Albany for $1750.62, which check had been 
deposited by Mr. Ciiarles Yates for collection. It was some two years afterwards 
when the error was discovered by the bank. When discovered, the cashier called 
on Mr. Wood, who denied owing the bank any thing, but admitted that the check 



24 THE BANK TRANSACTION. 

for $1150.62 was not his. The matter was by agreement referred to arbitration. 
D. A. Cushman, "Wm. McMurray, and a Mr. Gilbert, were the referees. They 
agreed, after hearing the case, that Mr. "Wood owed the bank $2,143.90, which was 
the amount of the above-mentioned check, with interest added. 

The testimony of the Cashier of the Bank. — The following testimony of the cashier 
of the bank is taken from the notes of "Wm. Inglis, who was "Wood's attorney ui the 
case: 

" I had a conversation with Mr. Wood, in -which I told him an error had been discovered In his 
bank account, which brought him in debt to the bank about $1750. He (Wood) said such an error 
could not exist, and that he could not be indebted to the bank in that sum. I said it occurred by 
passing to his credit a check on an Albany bank, which check belonged not to him, but to another 
person doing business with the bank. He admitted that he had had no such check for collection, 
but repeated that he owed the bank nothing. I then asked him for his bank-books and check- 
books. He said they had all been burned up. Ho appeared surprised at the statement of his 
overdrawing, and referred to his once having overdrawn his account with the bank, but when 
notified of the fact, promptly made it good." 

Such is the testimony, as taken down by Judge Inglis, who was "Wood's counsel 
in the case. "When "Wood was a candidate for Congress, in 1 840, he was charged 
with this bank transaction, and he applied to his counsel, Judge Inghs, for a state- 
ment of the case, so as to remove the unfavorable impression that pervaded the 
public mind in relation to it. Judge Inglis, no doubt, did the best he could for his 
client under the circumstances cf the case. 

Mr. Cushman, one of the referees, published the following card in relation to the 
subject: 

"It appeared In evidence before the referees, that Mr. Wood kept a small account with the Mer- 
chants' Exchange Bank, from the month of September, (April it should be,) 1S36, to March, 1839, 
and that his several deposits during that time varied from .$96.88 to $.349.42 ; that in the month 
of November, 1836, the clerk or book-keeper of the bank, by mistake, posted to his credit a check 
on Albany, for $1,750.62, which had been deposited by Mr. Charles Yates, for collection, and that 
before the error was discovered by the bank, Mr. AVood drew out the whole of that amount in 
small checks or drafts, varying from $30 to $2S7..')ii — which checks or drafts were produced in 
evidence before the referees, to the amount of tuk credits on the books or tuk Bank, in- 
cluding THE CHECK OP $1,750.62, belonging to Mr. C. Yates. 

" It was proved before the referees, that when the Bank discovered the error in posting said 
check to Mr. Wood's account, which was more than two years after it occurred, the Casuiee op 
THE Bank called on Mr. Wood, stated to him the fact of the overdraft to the 
amount op the check in question, and requested permission to look at his (Wood's) bank-book. 
Mr. Wood replied that his bank-book had been burned up at a fire in Washington street. He ad- 
mitted to the cashier, that the check which had tieen passed to his credit, through the error of 
the book-keeper, did not belong to him, but asserted that the mistake must have occurred In some 
other way, and that he owed the bank nothing. 

"The report of two of the referees (the third not being present at the last meeting) was in favor 
of the bank to the amount of the erroneous credit of Mr. Yates' check, which, including interest, 
was $2,148.90. D. A. CUSHMAN." 

Judge IngUs says that Mr. Cushman is m error in stating that "Wood's connection 
with the bank commenced in September, 1836. It was in April of that year when 
he made his first deposit. "We have stated, previously, that it was in April when 
he opened an account with the bank. The error, however, is not material. The 
referees agreed that "Wood owed the bank the amount of the check alluded to, 
together with the interest. There was no doubt about this fact. The bank pro- 
duced "Wood's checks, by which he had drawn the $1750 out of the bank in small 
sums, soon after which he closed his account with the bank. "Wood admitted that 
the check was not his, but insisted that he owed nothing to the bank. Though 
his check-books were burned, the bank had liis checks on which he had drawn the 
money. His bank-book was also burned, or not produced, so that he had nothing 
to say, except that he owed the bank no money. He had nothing to show that 
he ever had any dealings with the bank. Of course, whether his bank-book was 
burned or not, he knew enough not to exhibit it to the referees. He knew, and 
every one of the referees knew, that he had drawn the money, and of course his 
bank-book would have shown the fact, the same as his checks did, which the bank 
produced. But as the check for $1,750.62 deposited by Mr. Yates, did not belong 
to "Wood, the moment he produced his bank-book, in which he was credited with 
that check, it would be evident to all that he was cognizant of the error, and that 
he was perpetratmg a fraud on the bank whenever he drew his check for any part 
of that money. 



DETAILED SPECIFICATION OF FRAUDS. 25 

The above are the facts in this somewhat celebrated case. No one can reason- 
ably doubt that Fernando Wood knew he was perpetrating a fraud in drawing this 
$1,750.62 from the bank. He was then doing a small business, had little money, 
and never the one fourth part of $1,700 in the bank at any one time. So he never 
pretended to claim that he deposited that amount, or such a check, at any time. 
Of course he knew enough not to claim to have owned such a check, as the falsity 
of such a claim would have been exposed at once. To lose his bank-book was the 
best thing that could happen to him. That fire in Washington street was a very 
fortunate tiling for him. His bank-book was not necessary to show that he had 
drawn this $1,750.62 from the bank, as his checks in possession of the bank sliowed 
this ftict. But its production before the referees would have shown conclusively 
that he kniew he was defrauding the bank in drawing this money. No doubt his 
bank-book credited him with this amount, and he knew of the fraud he was perpe- 
trating, but the fraud would have appeared more glaring had his bank-book been 
shown. 

Truly, the entire business life of Fernando Wood furnishes evidence of his vil- 
lainies. Could an impartial history of Mr. Wood be written, every page would 
contain evidence enough to consign him to a felon's cell. Who supposes for a mo- 
ment that his bank-book was burned? or that he, who never had had $400 in the 
bank at any one time, was ignorant of the fraud he was perpetrating ? The man 
who could deliberately forge a bill of sale of the bark John W. Cater, or the T. 0. 
Larkin letter, or who could convert a bill of 75 cents into $100.75, by a few strokes 
of the pen, and thus defraud his partner in business, and then swear that he had 
done none of these things, could easily destroy his bank-book. 



A DETAILED SPECIFICAnON OF SOME OF THE MEECANTILE FRAUDS 
OF MAYOR WOOD. 

The following will show the various modes by which Fernando Wood managed 
to rob his partner. It will bo seen that in purchasing the outfits of the barque 
John W. Cater, which actually cost but aljout $1800, he, by various devices, frauds, 
alterations of bUls, forging bills for goods never purchased, and other tricks of the 
trade entirely unknown to Goodhue & Co., Wm. B. Astor, and the rest of the 
"twenty-eight," who urge him to consent to a reelection to the Mayoralty, he 
managed to make his partner pay the entire actual cost of the outfits. 

THE PORK FRAUD. 

Wood rendered his partner a bill of Hovrard &, Wiutringham for stores amount- 
ing to $430.66. The bill included thirty barrels of pork at $10 a barrel, which 
were not shipped or used on the said barque John W. Cater, and the actual amount 
of money paid by Wood to Howard & Wintringham for supplies furnished to, and 
put on board, said vessel, did not exceed the sum of $130.66. 

THE LARD FRAUD. 

Wood rendered a bill of John R. Woolsey for groceries amounting to $35.87.' 
Tills bill included four kegs of lard not shipped or used on said barque, amounting 
to $23.70, making the cash actually paid by Wood for said groceries actually- fur- 
nished and put on board $7.17. 

THE FISH AND OIL FRAUD. 

Wood rendered another bill of J. R. Woolsey, for fish and oil, amounting to 
$39.85. Tliis bUl included thirty gallons of oil not shipped or used on said barque, 
amounting to $30, making the amount actually paid by Wood for said supplies 
$9.86. ^ 



26 SPECIFIED FKAUDS IN THE CARGO PURCHASE. 

THE BEEF, TONGUES, PORTER, CIDER AND ALE FRAUD. 

Wood rendered his partner a bill of Benjamin Hall & Co., for stores, consisting 
of family-beef; tongues, porter, cider, lard, etc., amounting to $214.90, no part of 
•which was shipped or used on said barque. 

THE FLOUR AND MEAT FRAUD. 

Wood rendered his partner a bUl of C. il. Holcomb, for flour, meat, etc., amount- 
ing to $14.75, which included items amounting to $8.25, which were not shipped on 
said barque. 

FRAUDS IN THE PURCHASE OF EGGS, DUCKS, TURKEYS, OYSTERS, 
BEEP, PORK, AND VEGETABLES. 

Wood rendered a bill of J. W. Froam, for poultry, etc., consisting of ducks, tur- 
keys, eggs, oysters, fresh beef and porls;, and vegetables, amounting to $54.50, no 
part of which was shipped or used on said barque. 

There are several other frauds in this outfit account, all of which were proven 
conclusively. It is astounding to see how lie oontrived to crowd into the account 
so many frauds on an aggregate purchase of less than $2000, but which he magni- 
fied to near $3600. He absolutely perpetrated a fraud La about every bill he pur- 
chased. 



SOME OF THE FR4UDS IN THE PTTRCHASE OF THE CARGO SPECIFIED. 

Wood's purchases of the cargo amounted, according to the bills he rendered his 
partner, to over $7000, as we have before stated. But the actual cost of his pur- 
chases on this account was only about half this sum. 

Some specimens of how this was done wiU be given. 

THE CIGAR FRAUD. 

Wood said he bought of Holt & Palmer a quantity of cigars, and represented that 
he had agreed to pay therefor the sum of $374.15, and produced and exliibited to 
Marvine a paper which he. Wood, represented to be the bill rendered by said Holt 
& Palmer to lum therefor, which bill, as presented by Wood to Marvine, correspond- 
ed with the representation. After the bill had been delivered. Wood fraudulently 
and deceitfully altered it, or caused it to be altered, by insertmg in a line thereof 
in which the original charge was "10 M Palo Alto 8 80," the figure 1 before the 8, 
so as to make said charge $18 instead of $8 per thousand ; and by placing the 
figure 1 before the extension of 80, so as to make the extension thereof $180 ; and 
by altering the figure 2 at the footing of said bill into the figure 3, so as to make 
the footing thereof $374.15 instead of $274.15, as originally rendered. 

THE BRQpM FRAUD. 

Wood said he bought of Taggart & Gray 100 dozen brooms, at $1| per dozen, 
and exhibited to Marvine a paper purporting to be, and which he represented to 
be, the original bill, as rendered by said Taggart & Gray to him for said purchase, 
which bin, as so presented, corresponded with and sustained the representation so 
made by Wood. Marvine discovered that said brooms, so purchased, were bought 
by Wood at $If per dozen, and that the original bOl was rendered by said Taggart 
& Gray for that price, but that after the dehvcry thereof by them. Wood fraudulently 
and deceitfully altered, or caused and procured the said bill to be altered, by chang- 
ing the price from $1| to l|per dozen, and the extension from $137 to $187. 

THE PAPER FRAUD. 

Wood purchased from Cyrus W. Field & Co., a quantity of paper, amounting to 
tho gum of $569.76, and exhibited to Marvine a paper purporting to be, and which 



THE KIGHT TO PUBLISH THE TESTIMONY. 27 

he represented to be, the original bill thereof^ as rendered by said Cyrus TV. Field 
& Co. for said purchase, which bill, as so presented by Wood, corresponded with the 
representation. That since the settlement of the said account Marvine, discovered 
that "Wood did not purchase from Cyrus W. Field & Co. paper to the amount so re- 
presented by him. In the original bill, dehvered by the said Cyrus W. Field to 
him, were the four items following : 

60 reams white plain letter, $1-|, $82 50 
60 do. do. do. do. 82 50 

40 da cap do. do. 50 00 

40 do. do. do. do. 50 00 

Wood fraudulently and deceitfully altered, or procured to be altered, the said 
bill, so as to make the price of each of the sixty reams of paper mentioned in tlie 
first two items above stated, the sum of $2f per ream, instead of $lf, and the ex- 
tensions thereof to be $142.50, instead of $82.50 respectively, thus adding to each 
of said items the sum of $60 ; and in like manner further fraudulently and deceit- 
fully altered, or procured to be altered, the said bill, so as to make the price of 
each of the forty reams of paper mentioned in the last two items above stated, the 
sum of $1| per ream, instead of $1:J-, and the extensions thereof respectively to be 
$70 instead of $50, thus adding to each of the said last two items the sum of 
$20; and by fraudulently and deceitfully altering, or procuring to be altered, the 
footing of said bill from the sum of $109.76 to the sum of $5G9.76. 

THE TOBACCO FRAUD. 

Wood bought from James Hunter & Co., a quantity of tobacco to the amount of 
$504.35, and e.xliibitod to Marvine a paper purporting to be the original bill of said 
purchase, as rendered to him by said James Hunter & Co., which bill, as so repre- 
lented, corresponded with the representation. Wood fraudulently and deceitfully 
dtored the bill so as to make the price ll|c. per pound, histead of 9c., and the 
sxtension thereof, $471.38 instead of $3GS.9l, as in the original invoice, and by 
dtering in like manner the footmg thereof from $401.56 to $504 03. 

THE OIL AND GLASS FRAUD. 

Wood bought from Wm. E. Lawrence, a quantity of glass and linseed oil, amount- 
ing to the sum of $325.11, and exhibited to Marvine a paper purporting to be the 
original bill of the said William E. Lawrence delivered to him therefor. Wood 
fraudulently and deceitfully altered the said bill by making the discount upon the 
said glass 10 per cent instead of 30 per cent, and by fraudulently altering the ex- 
tension thereof and the footing of said bill, so as to make the aggregate thereof the 
sum of $825.11 instead of $589.11. 

THE FRAUD IN MATCHES. 

Wood said he had paid to Charles Partridge $526.24 for a quantity of matches; 
that said Partridge made at the same time, bythe said barque John W. Cater, a ship- 
ment on his own private account, valued at $2,000, and Wood charged said Partridge 
$100 for insurance on his said goods, and deducted said sum from the amount of 
said bill for $526.24. Wood did not insure tlie said cargo, nor pay any sum there- 
for, and did not pay to said Partridge atiy greater sum than $426.24 for said 
matches. 



THE RIGHT TO PUBLISH THE TESTIMONY IN THE MARVINE AND 
WOOD CASE-AN INJUNCHON SUED OUT BY WOOD, AND DISSOLVED 
BY THE COURT. 

Our "model" Mayor, two years ago, fearing that the testimony in this case 
would find its way in the public prints, and thus injure him at the polls, sued out 
an mjunction to restrain the publication of the testimony before the referees. 

The foUowmg is the decision of Judges Duer and Oakley, dissolving the injunc- 
tion : 



28 CONCLUSION. 

Jud^e Duer: " Sitting as a judge, I am satisfied that I have no povrer to continue this injunc- 
tion, "l do not believe that a Court of Equity has ever attempted to restrain the publication of 
the proceedings in a pending action at law, either upon the grounds set forth in this complaint, or 
upon any other. Nor do I believe that, had the jurisdiction ever been claimed, the courts of law 
would have submitted to its exercise. It would have been regarded and resisted as manifest usur- 
pation of power. It is the exclusive privilege of the Court in which the action is pending to de- 
termine whether for any reason the publication of the proceedings ought to be forbidden; and 
where the publication is deemed to be necessary or proper, it can only be regularly made by an 
order in the cause. The case is not altered by the fact that the action is pending in this Court, 
•which is now a Court of Equity, as well as of law, for the Code has certainly not enlarged 
the equitable jurisdiction which it has given. It has given us no power to grant any other 
relief upon a complaint than that the Court of Chancery could have formerly granted upon a bill. 
If the plaintiff is entitled to the relief which he asks, he must seek it by a petition or motion in 
the action in which he is defendant He has mistaken his remedy In filing this complaint. 

" The motion to continue the injunction is denied, and the injunction heretofore granted is dis- 
solved." 

Oakley, Chief- Justice, concurred. L. B. Shepard, for plaintifit. James T. Brady, for defendant 

Thus it will be seen that our courts will not favor the idea that a knowledge of 
a man's crimes shall be hidden from the public. The right to publish the testi- 
mony includes the right to make such comments on it as truth and the pubhc in- 
terest require. The community must be protected against the villainy of its mem- 
bers, even though they never aspire to pubhc honors, or high official positions. 
But when those who have shown themselves bold and audacious in crime seek high 
places of power, patronage, and emolument, it becomes an important duty of the 
pubhc press to hold them up to the pubhc gaze in all the blackness of their true 
characters. 

CONCLUSION. 

And now, fellow citizens of the city and county of New- York, we ask you in 
sober seriousness whether there was ever before presented to your notice a mass of 
evidence so complete, so consecutive, so unanswerable, and so conclusive, as has 
been laid naked for your perusal and verdict in the preceding pages. If ever there 
existed a criminal whose coolness surpassed liis crimes, it is the hero of these 
pages. If ever there hved a culprit whose callousness exceeded his criminality, it 
is our " model Mayor." His villanies have been as clearly proven, and as un- 
mistakably demonstrated, as the clearest theorem in geometry. Fernando Wood 
has been a depredator m the bank, in the counting-house, at the merchant's desk, 
and in the Mayoralty chair. 

On land and on water he has proved himself a merciless Shylock and shark. He 
has filled his purse by the vilest means, and from the blackest resources. The barque 
J. W. Cater was freighted with the crimes of this practised tactician in the vocations 
of villainy and fraud ; and it is a miracle how that barque escaped being engulfed 
by the weight of crmie which hung arotmd and about her fouUy-obtained freight ! 
"What a man to be selected for the chief magistracy of a great commercial city ! 
What recklessness could prompt a community to hsten for a moment to the sug- 
gestion of any man, or body of men, to reelect a stamped plunderer and an acknow- 
ledged perjurer to the Mayoralty chair ? What blindness could have seized any 
party, however reckless and desperate may be its fortunes, to think that the peo- 
ple could endorse such a nominee for Mayor? What venality could induce any 
newspaper press, no matter to what depths of pohtical degradation it may have be- 
fore then sounded, to attempt to pawn such an excrescence upon an outraged peo- 
ple as this hero of a hundred perjuries and forgeries? If we were to seek in our 
State prison, or even to ransack the dreary regions below, it may be questioned 
whether we could find a candidate for public favor better adapted to plunder th* 
tax-payers than this model swindler, this accomphshed forger and classic perjurer— 
our " model" Mayor I 

It would be a sad commentary upon the inteUigence and integrity of our people 
should the returns of the next election announce the victory of Fernando Wood. 

It will generally be admitted that a man who wLU defraud a partner in business— 
who will make false representations to another to induce him to enter into a part 
nership — who will prepare false, simvJated, or forged papers and letters relating tc 
the business of the partnership, and thereby induce another to invest large sum* 
of money for their jomt advantage — who will, after this fraud and deception ha«i 
been practised, continue to perpetrate other frauds in the purchase of goods to a 
large amount, and render fraudulent bills to his partner, in which the quantity of 



CONCLUSION. • 29 

the articles purchased, and the prices paid for them, are greater than the true bills 
of purchase show, and then obtain from his partner the one half of the aggregate 
of the fraudulent prices — who wUl, when fearing detection, call upon the merchants 
from whom he purchased, and endeavor to prevail upon them to alter their bills, 
and make them more in amount than he actually paid them, and request them to 
hand these new and fraudulent bills to any one who might call to inquire into the 
matter — and who will, in every transaction relating to the partnership business, 
defraud and deceive his partner ; we say it will be generally admitted that such a 
man is a dangerous member of society, a desperate and unmitigated villain, totally 
devoid of honorable principle, and preeminently unfit for high and honorable pub- 
lic station. No honorable man of any party would give such a person his vote for 
the Mayoralty. 

It requires the strongest kind of testimony to satisfy the minds of our people 
that such bold and systematic frauds could be perpetrated by one partner upon an- 
other. Many will not believe that human nature can be so degraded as to have 
perpetrated so many frauds, and of so gross a character, throughout the entire 
business of a partnership. 

But when the allegations of fraud are clearly shown by testhnony as strong and 
conclusive as any that ever was given m a court of justice, then it becomes a mat- 
ter of serious consideration for every good member of society. If circumstances 
should place such an individual before the community for their suffrages, for the 
highest office in their gift, then his character becomes a proper subject for dis- 
cussion. 

This candidate is Fernando Wood. There is the strongest possible proof that 
Mr. "Wood has been guilty of all the fraudulent practices we have alluded to, and ia 
a person totally unfit for public station, and unworthy of the public confidence. 

In the whole history of mercantile life and business, we do not know where to 
look for a parallel to this in the atrocity of its frauds. No litigated case of part- 
nership that we have ever heard of shows such consummate and systematic decep- 
tion. The recital should put shamelessness itself to the blush. 

The whole case is one of extreme interest to the pubhc, and it is every man's 
duty to examine into it It may be painful to our moral feeHngs to be convinced 
that a nominee for the Mayoralty stands thus disgraced ; but we must remember 
that the elevation to office of such a man would extend the odium to all who par- 
ticipate in our elections. Better that Mr. Wood alone should suffer the loss of Ms 
reputation, and our city government be freed from such an executive head, than 
our whole people should be disgraced along with him. 

There seems to have been on the part of Wood a preconcerted and villainous 
duplicity throughout the entire business of the Marvine partnership. This arch- 
scoundrel and unscrupulous scamp, committed the most outrageous frauds that are 
known to the history of mercantile crimes. The meanest and most matured plans 
were laid by him for a wholesale plunder of his partner. His whole talents seemed 
to be employed to see how much he could plunder on the purchases he made. He 
never purchased a bill of goods but what lie perpetrated a fraud. He would en- 
deavor to induce the merchant who sold him to charge a high price, so that h- 
could deduct some 30 or 40 per cent for cash, and then alter the bill by changmg 
the 30 or 40 per cent into 10 per cent. If he could not succeed in this, he would 
alter the prices in the bill, increase the quantity bought, or inserfin the bill articles 
never purchased. By these means about every bill he handed to ' js partner for 
goods, etc., purchased by him, contained three or four fraudulent alterations, or 
forgeries. 

This man Wood has contrived to get the endorsement of a few wealthy mer- 
chants. -K these men imagme that they wiU control to any great extent the voters 
of this city, they are deluded. They may have power over the money-bags, but 
not over the minds and consciences of the people. Reelect Fernando Wood, and 
you will prove that the way to reach emmence and power is by perfidy, robbery, 
perjury, and fraud. Reelect him, and you throw the city in the hands of an un- 
scrupulous ruffian, whose tools and friends will be those who will divide with him 
the profits of the gambhng, lottery, and policy shops of our city. 

In his recent nomination for the mayoralty he brought to hia aid the police de- 
partment, and used the whole power of his position to effect it. Immediately after 



30 CONCLUSION, 

his defeat iu his aspirations for the office of Governor, he organized an association, 
of which the members were bound to secrecy, having for its object his renomination, 
to the oEBce of mayor. To this association various members of the pohce depart- 
ment were attached, in violation of the rule of that department, which forbids them 
to be members of any political organization. The immediate purpose of this secret 
organization was to control the general committee, and to place the primary elec- 
tions in the hands of Mr. Wood, by the selection of those persons for inspectors 
who were committed to return a "ticket favorable to his re-nomination, whether it 
should be elected or not. 

" Having made these arrangements, he procured the majority of the general 
committee to adopt a rule by which himself and Daniel E. Sickles could come into 
that committee by substitution, and took his seat side by side with members of the 
police department who were there, as we have said, in violation of the rules and 
regulations of that department, and who obeyed his dictation in the votes they 
gave while there, and under his political command. Having thus become a mem- 
ber of the general committee, he proceeded to get through that body a plan of elec- 
tions which should place every nomination in the city, whether for mayor, city 
judge, alderman, or councilman, member of Congress or other officer, entirely at 
his disposal. "We do not deem it necessary to set forth here the monstrous evils 
which must spring from the conversion of the police department into a mere politi- 
cal machine for the accomplishment of the personal aims of an individual so reckless 
and unscrupulous as the present Mayor. 

This business having been done, he himself moved his plan of primary elections, 
rt was to the effect that the inspectors of elections should be appointed in each 
ward by a majority of the delegates from that ward, and that in those wards 
where there was no agreement, they should be appointed by a committee, to con- 
sist of Fernando Wood and a majority of his friends. The majority of this com- 
mittee belonged to the secret organization to which reference has been made : and 
the plan was adopted by the votes of that organization, together with tiie votes of 
a few others who sought to save themselves in their own wards by yielding to 
the current. Every member of the police department present in committee voted with 
Mr. Wood in its favor. 

The Committee of Organization met; Mr. Wood moved Mr. Sickles into the chair; 
he moved inspectors in all the wards in which no agreement had been had, and 
but one single inspector was appointed who was not known to be in his interest. 

And to crown all, and deprive this stupendous fraud of even the pretext of regu- 
larity^, the delegates thus chosen assembled at the Mayor's house the following 
Sunday, and resolved to take possession of the room of the Convention at Tammany 
Hall. 

The subject of this biography is, perhaps, one of the most singular men in the 
community. The phOosopher asserts that each individual has certain marked pe- 
culiarities of mind and morals, wliich distinguish him as positively from every 
other man as does the peculiar features of the face. Each man exhibits a group 
of distinctive traits belonging to the mind or lieart, and which are the offspring of 
some natural tendency, or are the result of his education. Fernando Wood is in- 
nately prone to dishonesty. His whole business life shows liim in the capacity of 
an artful Knave, who loves money for the power it confers, but who prefers to get 
it by fraud, '•ather than by honorable, upright dealing. Whether as a merchant or 
a politician, h 3 always operates secretly. His great desire to be Mayor of this city 
grew out of a supposition that the ofiBce would make him acquainted with all the 
schemes resorted to by the bold and lawless to plunder the community. No gam- 
bling-house, from the lowest crib to the most splendid establishment in the city, 
will ever be interfered with by him, so long as they divide the profits with the 
Mayor or his friends, who are believed by many to derive a pecimiary interest from 
the vocation. It is quite certain that no establishment of the kind can flourish in 
this city unless his friends share the plunder. And it is generaDy admitted in the 
fraternity of gamblers, that some of the Wood family must share the profits, or they 
will be broken up. 

Wood possesses considerable power in preyaiEng on others, men of integrity, to 
render him their pohtical support. At the time he was a candidate for the Mayor- 
alty, two years ago, he was frequently known to shed tears in corapaaxy with those 



coiircujsioN. 31 

whose support he knew to bo important. He solemnly asserted to them that he 
wanted to be Mayor so as to redeem his reputation. But no sooner in office than 
we find him prostituting the position to protect all the polluted and hellish practices 
which exist in tlie cit_r. He has been charged with tlie practice of knavery in all 
the relations of life — of having defrauded friend and partner in business — of beino- 
a sharer in the plunder of the most lucrative illegal gambling transactions 
practised in the city. He is bold in aU this crime. He moralizes against it in 
his pubhc messages, and then retires to count over the profits he has realized from 
the illegal and swindling business. He who can fraudulently convert a biU of 75 
cents into one of $100.75, can not give character to a great commercial city, by be- 
ing elevated to the Mayoralty. We have State-prisons for the reformation of cri- 
minals, and the office of Mayor was never intended as a position in which crime 
could be atoned for, or a villainous reputation whitewashed into purity. If the 
theory is sound that we should seek to convert our most adroit swindlers and forg- 
ers to honest, upright citizens, by giving them high civil positions, then we should 
expect the several parties to nominate candidates who resided within tlie walls of 
our prisons. Sincere repentance for past crimes does not require to emanate from 
the Mayor's ofiSce in the City Hall. It can be better had in the quiet closet, and 
by an altered life in business. Once establish the practice of elevating our worst 
men to office, and you offer a bounty on criminality. If we elect a Mayor whose 
reputation for integrity and rascahty is notoriously bad, by the same reasoning we 
should expect him to fill aU the offices in his gift with the same class of persons. 
This rule would bring the vile and infamous into public place, and morality, law, 
and common decency would be violated in every department of the city govern- 
ment. "We doubt whether the oldest resident of this city can call to mind a period 
of time when there was greater demoralization in our city government. Wood has 
boldly assumed doubtful powers, and controls nearly every department of tlie citj'. 
To him, therefore, must be attributed the evils complained of. 

It can scarcely be possible that any man who attentively peruses a history of his 
frauds will aid in his reelection. "We think it may be assumed that he must be de- 
feated. But his defeat must be the work of those who feel a deep interest in the 
reputation of our city, and who prefer an honest administration of the government. 
His saintly hypocrisy has been unveiled : the gauze that covered it has been re- 
moved. The honest portion of the public now see Fernando Wood in the light of a 
plunderer. His commendable acts when first elected Maj'or, have all become ob- 
solete. His absolute indifference to public morals, if he does not absolutely encour- 
age crime and vice, is so perceptible that it can not be mistaken for honest inten- 
tion. The Joseph Walker swindle developed his true aim, as soon as he had 
got fairly seated in the Mayor's chair. Ho opened his complami-book merely to 
see where the plunder was, and when he found it, he seized upon it with avidity. Ho 
looks up his old friend Jones, to whom ho once wanted to have the Marvine mat- 
ters referred, and in haste proposes a conti-act to rob the city treasury of $13,000. 
When the fraud is detected, Wood swears before the committee that he will in- 
demnify the city for the loss growing oat of the contract. He swore he would pay 
the damages out of his own pocket. He has not yet made his oath good, nor does 
any one suppose he ever intended to. He who could swear that he never present- 
ed a forged bill of sale, a forged letter, or fraudulently altered, or caused to be al- 
tered, a score of bills and vouchers, would not hesitate to swear that he would pay 
all the damages that the city incurred by his rascahty. That he did, without any 
authority, reach out his polluted hand and dip it into the treajSury-box of the city, 
and plunder it of the $7500 which Jones got, and which he probably divided, 
thero is no more doubt than there is that we have so stated it. To look at this 
man, Wood, in all the attitudes of life, as a merchant, a pohtician, or Mayor of the 
city, the heart sickens at the corruption evinced in his nature, and warns us that 
we must as a people, be more cautious in the exercise of the franchise, if we would 
preserve the reputation of our city. 



A FIVE HUNDBED DOLL&B SALE. 

The following, though not strictly in the fine of the biography of our Mayor, may 
be appropriately appended t» this number, aa serying to show the reader the deep 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




32 CONCLUSION. 



005 075 406 6 



interest manifested in thia biographical sketch. I understood from a prominent 
citizen that certain parties were desirous to purchase the manuscript of this num- 
ber. I was told that if I would step into Delmonico's at a particular hour of the 
day, I would meet a person who would pay $500 for the manuscript. 1 called at 
the hour stated, and saw Col. Alexander Ming, Chief Clerk to the Mayor, Wm. M. 
Cooke, Private Secretary to his Honor, and Chas. M. Fletcherj the special friend of 
the Mayor, and a perfect gentleman. Observing this trio in close conversation in 
a corner of the bar-room, I very naturally came to the conclusion that they were 
the intended purchasers of the important documents in my possession. This sup- 
position was soon proved correct. Mr. Cooke, one of the party, politely addressed 
me with a countenance as smiling aa one of the Rothschilds or Stephen Girard, 
when they anticipated they saw before them a customer with whom a good bar- 
gain could be struck. He invited me to a little close conversation in a private 
room up stairs, in which was a large centre-table, apparently used for purposes of a 
little social gambling, for mere amusement — a recreation which the Mayor, nor his 
clerks or secretaries, have no right to interfere with. Friend Fletcher accompanied 
us to this pinnacle apartment, and Col. Ming did not, but, we suppose, remained in 
front of the bmlding as a guard, that no intruder should be permitted to enter and 
interfere with certain contemplated arrangements, which he, of course, knew, or, 
at least, expected, would be soon consummated, when he could report progress to 
his Honor, who, no doubt, was waiting in a state of perturbation of mind to hear 
tiio result of the speculation. 

After we were seated, Mr. Cooke said : 

" I suppose you are aware of the nature of my business with you ?" 

" I suppose I am," said I. 

"I have," said he, " $500 for you, if you deliver to me a certain manuscript, and 
sign this paper." (Unfolding the following agreement.) 

I read the document, suggested some alterations, and appended to it tjie conclud- 
ing paragraph. The changes made were assented to, the paper was executed, and 
the money paid, in good notes of our city banks ; not one of which was issued by 
the Shoe & Leather concern, in which the funds of the city are kept. This being 
done, the party dispersed quietly, and aU in good humor. 

Upon mature reflection, and by the advice of counsel, I have come to the con- 
clusion that a biography of our Mayor ought to be published, and if in so doing the 
following agreement is violated, I am ready to pay to Wm. M. Cooke, or to any per- 
son he may name, $500, so soon as he estabhshes before any tribunal of justice in 
the United States that the agreement has been violated, or that he is entitled to 



Copy of Aobekment f.ntbked into between "Wm. M. Cooke, the Mayor's Private Sbcbe- 

TAEY, AND THE AUTUOR OP THIS BlOGRAPUY, IN PRESENCE OP CUAS. M. FlETCIIEB. 

For and in consideration of the sum of five hundred dollars to me In hand paid by William M. 
Cooko oCthe City of New-York, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, I, Abijah Ingraham, 
of said City, do hereby bind myself, and solemnly pledge my honor as "a man, not to violate or 
break, either directly or indirectly, the following agreements hereby entered into by me : 

I hereby agree that a certain manuscript written by myself relative to the Hon. Fernando Wood, 
and vhich said manuscript, on the payment of the above-mentioned sum, I have delivered to the 
said William M. Cooke in full, shall not be published in any newspaper, periodical, magazine, 
pamphlet, or book, issued in this city or elsewhere. I also do declare that I have no copy of said 
manuscript in my possession, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, state that no other per- 
son or persons have any copy or copies of the same. 

I also agree for and in consideration of the said sum of five hundred dollars, not to write or 
cause to be written or published, or be concerned in the publication of any article or articles, or 
matter of any description, reflecting in any way, directly or indirectly, upon the lion. Fernando 
Wood, previous to the g^sncral election in New-York in November, 1S56. 

I also agree that should the above conditions be violated by me, to pay back to the said William 
M. Cooke the sum of five hundred dollars paid to me by him, and in the event of my refusing tt 
do so, the saiil William M. Cooke shall have ample remedy by recourse to legal procee<lings in ajfy 
court in the United States, to compel the payment of the same on satisfactory proof being adduced 
that an J of the above conditions have been violated by me, or that I have broken faith" with the 
said, William M. Cooko, contrary to the foregoing stipulations. 

If the manuscript now delivered to the said William M. Cooke should hereafter be published, I, 
Abijah Ingraham, shall bo entitled to the profits arising from said publication. 

ABIJAH INGRAHAM. 

I certify that this Is a true copy of the original deUyered to Wm. M. Cooke, In the presence of 

0. FLETOHEB. 
Doted Sept. 28, 1856, at the City of Novr-Tork. 



